Skip to main content

Full text of "A Critical And Exegetical Commentary Gospel According To St. Luke"

See other formats














THIS volume has no such ambitious aim as that of being a 
final commentary on the Gospel according to S. Luke. 
The day is probably still far distant when any such com- 
mentary can be written. One of the difficulties with which 
the present commentator has had to contend is the im- 
possibility of keeping abreast of all that is constantly 
appearing respecting the Synoptic Gospels as a whole and 
this or that detail in them. And the Third Gospel abounds 
in details which have elicited special treatment at the hands 
of a variety of scholars. Every quarter, indeed almost every 
month, brings its list of new books, some of which the 
writer wishes that he could have seen before his own words 
were printed. But to wait is but to prolong, if not to 
increase, one's difficulties : it is waiting dum dejluat amnis. 
Notes written and rewritten three or four times must be 
fixed in some form at last, if they are ever to be published, 
And these notes are now offered to those who care to use 
them, not as the last word on any one subject, but simply 
as one more stage in the long process of eliciting from the 
inexhaustible storehouse of the Gospel narrative some of 
those things which it is intended to convey to us. They 
will have done their work if they help someone who is far 
better equipped entirely to supersede them. 

The writer of this volume is well aware of some of 
it* shortcomings. There are omissions which have been 
knowingly tolerated for one or other of two adequate 
reasons, (i) This series is to include a Commentary on 



the Synopsis of fa Four Gospels by the Rev. Dr. Sanday, 
Lady Margaret Professor of Divinity, Oxford, and his dis- 
tinguished pupil, the Rev. W. C Allen, Fellow and Lecturer 
of Exeter College. Various questions, especially as regards 
the relations of the Third Gospel to the First and Second, 
which have been but slightly touched or entirely passed 
over in this volume, can be more suitably treated, and will 
be much more efficiently treated, by those who are to com- 
ment on the Synopsis. (2) Economy of space has had to 
be considered and rigorously enforced. It has been 
thought undesirable to allow more than one volume to 
any one book in the New Testament : and therefore sub- 
jects, which might with propriety be discussed at some 
length in a work on the Gospel of S. Luke, have of 
necessity been handled very briefly or left entirely un- 
touched Indeed, as editor of those New Testament 
volumes which are written by British scholars, the present 
writer has been obliged to strike out a good deal of what 
he had written as contributor to this series. And it has 
been with a view to economize space that the paraphrastic 
summaries, which are so very valuable a feature in the 
commentary on Romans, have been altogether omitted, as 
being a luxury rather than a necessity in a commentary on 
one of the Synoptic Gospels* For the same reason separate 
headings to sections and to special notes have been used 
very sparingly. The sub-sections have no separate head- 
ings, but are preceded by an introductory paragraph, the 
first sentence of which is equivalent to a heading, 

The fact of the same person being both contributor 
and editor has, in the case of this volume, produced short- 
comings of another kind. Two heads are better than one, 
and two pairs of eyes are better than one. Unintentional 
and unnecessary omissions might have been avoided, and 
questionable or erroneous statements might have been 
amended, if the writer had had the advantage of another's 
supervision. Even in the humble but important work of 


detecting misprints the gain of having a different reviser is 
great Only those who have had the experience know how 
easy it is for the same eye to pass the same mistakes again 
and again. 

If this commentary has any special features, they will 
perhaps be found in the illustrations taken from Jewish 
writings, in the abundance of references to the Septuagint 
and to the Acts and other books of the New Testament, in 
the frequent quotations of renderings in the Latin Versions, 
and in the attention which has been paid, both in the 
Introduction and throughout the Notes, to the marks of S. 
Luke's style. 

The illustrations from Jewish writings have been sup- 
plied, not because the writer has made any special study 
of them, but because it is becoming recognized that the 
pseudepigraphical writings of the Jews and early Jewish,, 
Christians are now among the most promising helps' 
towards understanding the New Testament ; and because 
these writings have of late years become much more 
accessible than formerly, notably by the excellent editions 
of the Book of Enoch by Mr. Charles, of the Psalms of 
Solomon by Professor Ryle and Dr. James, and of the 
Fourth Book of *ra by the late Professor Bensly and Dr. 
James. 1 

A very eminent scholar has said that the best com* 
mentary on the New Testament is a good Concordance ; 
and another venerable scholar is reported to have said that 
the best commentary on the New Testament is the Vulgate. 
There is truth in both these sayings : and, with regard to 
the second of them, if the Vulgate by itself is helpful, d 
fortiori the Vulgate side by side with the Latin Versions 
which preceded it is likely to be helpful An effort has 

1 For general information on these Jewish writings see Schtirer, Hist, of the 
Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ, Edinburgh, 1886, Div. II. vol. lii.; 
W. J. Deane, Pseudepigrapha, Edinburgh, 1891 ; J. Winter und A. Wttnsche, 
Di* judisck* Ltoratur stit Absckfoss tits Kcaums % Trier : Part III, has just 


been made to render those who use this commentary to a 
large extent independent of a Concordance, and to some 
extent independent of the invaluable edition of the Vulgate 
now being produced by the Bishop of Salisbury and Mr. 
White. Great trouble has been taken with the numerous 
references to the Septuagint, the books of the New Testa* 
ment, and other writings. The large majority of them 
have been verified at least twice. But the difficulty of 
excluding error in such things is so great that the writer 
cannot suppose that he has succeeded in doing so. It is 
possible that a few references have accidentally escaped 
verification. A very few have been knowingly admitted 
without it, because the reference seemed to be of value, 
the source was trustworthy, and verification was not easy. 

Reasons are stated in the Introduction for regarding a 
study of S. Luke's style as a matter of great interest and 
importance ; and it is hoped that the analysis given of it 
there will be found useful. A minute acquaintance with it 
tells us something about the writer of the Third Gospel* 
It proves to us that he is identical with the writer of the 
Acts, and that the whole of both these books comes from 
his hand. And it justifies us in accepting the unswerving 
tradition of the first eight or nine centuries, that the writer 
of these two books was Luke the beloved physician* 

Dogma In the polemical sense is excluded from the plan 
of these commentaries. It is not the business of the com- 
mentator to advocate this or that belief. But dogma in the 
historical sense must of necessity be conspicuous in a com* 
mentary on any one of the Gospels. It is a primary duty 
of a commentator to ascertain the convictions of the 
writer whose statements he undertakes to explain. This 
is specially true of the Third Gospel, whose author tells 
us that he wrote for the very purpose of exhibiting the 
historical basis of the Christian faith (i. 1-4). The 
Evangelist assures Theophilus, and with him all other 
Christians, that he knows, upon first-hand and carefully 


investigated evidence, that at a definite point in the history 
of the world, not far removed from his own time, a Prophet 
of God once more appeared in Israel to herald the coming 
of the Christ (iii. 1-6), and that his appearance was im- 
mediately followed by that of the Christ Himself (iil 23, 
iv. 14, 15), whose Ministry, Passion, Death, and Resur- 
rection he then narrates in detail. On all these points 
the student is again and again met by the question, What 
does the Evangelist mean? And, although about this 
or that word or sentence there may often be room for 
discussion, about the meaning of the Gospel as a whole 
there is no doubt If we ask what were "the things 
wherein* Theophilus "was instructed " and of "the 
certainty" concerning which he is assured, the answer is 
not difficult We may take the Old Roman Creed as a 
convenient summary of it 

riumifo els 6c&K irorlpa irarrojcprfropa (L 37, ill 8, xL 24, 
xii. 32, etc). Kal cts Xpurrdf *li]aouK, vi&v aurou T&K powycrij 
(L 31, ii 21, 49> . 35, x. 21, 22, xriL 29, 70, xaciiL [33] 46: 
comp, iv. 41, viil 28), T&K KU'PIOK f^w (L 43, ii. n, vii. 13, x. i, 
xL 39, xii. 42, rvii 5, 6, xix. 8, 31, rxiL 61, xxiv. 3, 34) T&* 
yewr\Qtm, IK irrerfpaTos Ayiou Kal Mapias -njs irapO^ou (131-35, 43 
ii. 6, 7) 9 T&P i"A HoKTiou HiXdrou oraupoG^rra Kal Ta<j>^rra (xxii., 
xxiiL), rf| ffh^ t)^p<f AwwrrdLinra $* witpwK (xxiv. 1-49), 
els -roiis odpaKorfs (xriv. 50-53), itafcrj|jLw iv 8egi TOU 
(xxiL 69), 30K ?pxrai Kpivai twKras Kal KCKpous (comp. ix 26, 
xii- 3S-4^> xviil 8). Kal cl$ wcufta fyov (L 15, 35, 41, 67, ii. 26, 
iv. I, 14, xl 13, xil 10, 12)' Ay^ *KicXt|aiai> (comp. L 74, 75, 
ix. 1-6, 3L 1-16, xxiv. 49)- l+env Afiapriwr (L 77, ill 3, xxiv. 47)* 
<rapttds aydtoraaiK (v. 14, xx. 27-40). 

The Evangelist's own convictions on most of these 
points are manifest; and we need not doubt that they 
include the principal things in which Theophilus had been 
instructed, and which the writer of the Gospel solemnly 
affirms to be well established Whether In our eyes they 


are well established depends upon the estimate which we 
form of his testimony. Is he a truth-loving and competent 
witness? Does the picture which he draws agree with 
what can be known from other authorities ? Could he or 
his informants have invented the words and works which 
he attributes to Jesus Christ ? A patient and fair student 
of the Third Gospel will not be at a loss for an answer. 


University College, Durham^ 
Feast of S. Luic, i&fr 



f I. The Author ........ xi 

was the Author of the Acts . . * id 

a Companion of S. Paul . xii 

S. Luke . xHi 

f 2. S. Luke the Evangelist xviii 

{ 3. The Sources of the Gospel xxiii 

No Ebionite Source ...... xxv 

Supposed Dislike of Duplicates . . . . nviii 

| 4. Time and Place ........ xxix 

| 5, Object and Plan . xxxiii 

Analysis of the Gospel . xxxviii 

| 6, Characteristics, Style, and Language . xll 

The Gospel of S. Paul. . xliii 

of Prayer ...*. xlv 

ofPraise advi 

literary, historic, domestic advi 

S. Luke's Command of Greek idbc 

Expressions peculiar to S. Lukt Itt 

to him and S. Paul . . ttv 

to both with Hebrews . iviii 

to S. Luke with Hebrews Ux 

Expressions frequent in S. Lukt lix 

possibly medical hiii 

His Diction compared with that of S. Matthew 

and S. Mark Ixfi 

| 7. The Integrity of the Gospel facvii 

f 8. The Text hoc 

| 9. Literary History ....... hndii 

Clement of Rome . Ixriv 

IhtDidacM. bond 

Gospel of Ptttr . bonril 

TcstamfnisofXII.PatriarcJu , kxix 


|ia Commentates hoar 

Abbreviations Luucvl 



On the use of iyfar* . 45 

The Decree of Augustus * 48 

The fifteenth year of Tiberias . , . . 82 

The Genealogy ...... 101 

Demoniacal Possession ....... 136 

The Miraculous Draught of Fishes . . * 147 

The title "Son of Man" 156 

The word drvrcporprq . 165 

The Sermon M r<farov ire&vov . . , . 176 

Christ's Raising the Dead 301 

The Journeyings towards Jerusalem . . . . 360 

The word dvaXrj^is .... . . 362 

The Mission of the Seventy ...... 169 

The Idea of Hades or Sheolb the O,T. . . 597 

The Blind Man at Jericho . 
The Parable of the Pounds . 
The Question about Psalm at . 
The Apocalypse of Jesus 
Readings in Chapters xxiL and xxttL 
The Narratives of the Resurrection 


Western Non-interpolations ...... 66 

Interpolations in the Sinaitic Syiiac . , . . 169 


L General * 71 

II. Writers and Writings . , . . 177 

IIL Greek Words . 

IV. English and Latin Wocds . ... 90 



As in the case of the other Gospels, the author is not named in 
the book itself. But two things may be regarded as practically 
certain, and a third as highly probable in itself and much more 
probable than any other hypothesis, (i.) The author of the Third 
Gospel is the author of the Acts, (ii.) The author of the Acts 
was a companion of S. Paul (iii.) This companion was S. Luke. 

(I) The Author of the Third Gospel is the Author of the Acts. 

This position is so generally admitted by critics of all schools 
that not much time need be spent in discussing it Both books 
are dedicated to Theophilus. The later book refers to the former. 
The language and style and arrangement of the two books are so 
similar, and this similarity is found to exist in such a multitude of 
details (many of which are very minute), that the hypothesis of 
careful imitation by a different writer is absolutely excluded. The 
idea of minute literary analysis with a view to discover peculiarities 
and preferences in language was an idea foreign to the writers of 
the first two centuries ; and no known writer of that age gives 
evidence of the immense skill which would be necessary in order 
to employ the results of such an analysis for the production of an 
elaborate imitation. To suppose that the author of the Acts 
carefully imitated the Third Gospel, in order that his work might 
be attributed to the Evangelist, or that the Evangelist carefully 
imitated the Acts, in order that his Gospel might be attributed to 
the author of the Acts, is to postulate a literary miracle. Such an 
idea would not have occurred to any one ; and if it had, he would 
not have been able to execute it with such triumphant success 
as is conspicuous here. Any one who will underline in a few 
chapters of the Third Gospel the phrases, words, and constructions 
which are specially frequent in the book, and then underline the 



same phrases, words, and constructions wherever they occur in the 
Acts, will soon have a strong conviction respecting the identity of 
authorship. The converse process will lead to a similar result, 
Moreover, the expressions which can be marked in this way by no 
means exhaust the points of similarity between the two books. 
There are parallels of description ; e.g. about angelic appearances 
(comp. Lk. In with Acts xii. 7 ; Lk. i. 38 with Acts i. 1 1 and 
x. 7 ; Lk. ii. 9 and xxiv. 4 with Acts i. 10 and x. 30) ; and about 
other matters (comp. Lk. i. 39 with Acts L 15 ; Lk. ii. 39 with 
Acts xiii. 29 ; Lk. iii. 8 with Acts xxvi. 20 ; Lk. xx. i with Acts 
iv. i ; Lk. xxi. 18 with Acts xxvii. 34; Lk. xxi. 35 with Acts 
xvii. 26 ; Lk. xxiii. 2 with Acts xxiv. 2-5 ; Lk. xxiii. 5 with Acts 
x. 37 ; Lk. xxiv. 27 with Acts viii. 35). 1 And there are parallels 
of arrangement. The main portion of the Gospel has three marked 
divisions : The Ministry in Galilee (iii. i-ix. 50), between Galilee 
and Jerusalem (ix. si-xix. 28), and in Jerusalem (xix. 29-xxiv. ii). 
And the main portion of the Acts has three marked divisions : 
Hebraic (ii.-v.), Transitional (vi.-xii.), and Gentile (xm.-xxviii.). 
In the one case the movement is from Galilee through Samaria, 
etc. to Jerusalem : in the other from Jerusalem through Samaria, 
etc. to Rome. And in both cases there is an introduction con- 
necting the main narrative with what precedes. 

(ii.) The Author of Acts was a Companion of S. Paul. 

A full discussion of this statement belongs to the commentary 
on the Acts rather than to the present volume: but the main 
points in the evidence must be noted here. It is perhaps no 
exaggeration to say that nothing in biblical criticism is more 
certain than this statement 

There are the "we " sections in which the writer uses the first 
person plural in describing journeys of S. Paul. This "we" is 
found in Codex Bezae as early as xL 28 at Antioch, and may 
represent a true tradition without being the original reading. 2 
It appears certainly xvi. 10 at Troas 8 and continues to Philippi 
(xvi 17).* Several years later it reappears at Philippi (xx. 5) 8 and 
continues to Jerusalem (xxi. i8). 6 Finally, it reappears at the 
departure for Italy (xxvii, i) 7 and continues to Rome (xxviiL i6). 8 

1 J. Friedrich, Das LukcucoangeKvm und die Aptstdgtschichte 
dessdben Verfassers, Halle a.S., 1890. The value of this useful pamphlet is 
somewhat lessened by want of care in sifting the readings. The argument as a 
whole stands ; but the statistics on which it is based are often not exact. 

9 For dwioT&f 8i e& i% aftrGv D has (rvrcffrpapfdvw to fyt&v #if eZi # 
uuT&Vj revtrtentibus autcm nobis ait unus ex tpfis. This reading is also found 
in Augustine (De Serm. Dom* ii. 57 [xvii.]). 

$cX6c&. ^tur ttpafrr. 

|L] THE AUTHOR rii! 

The "we 11 necessarily implies companionship, and may possibly 
represent a diary kept at the time. That the "we" sections are 
by the same hand as the rest of the book is shown by ttye simple 
and natural way in which they fit into the narrative^ by the refer- 
ences in them to other parts of the narrative, and by the marked 
identity of style. The expressions which are so characteristic of 
this writer run right through the whole book. They are as 
frequent inside as outside the "we" sections, and no change of 
style can be noted between them and the rest of the treatise. 
The change of person is intelligible and truthlike, distinguishing 
the times when the writer was with the Apostle from the times 
when he was not : but there is otherwise no change of language. 
To these points must be added the fact that the author of the 
Acts is evidently a person of considerable literary powers, and the 
probability that a companion of S. Paul who possessed such 
powers would employ them in producing such a narrative as the 

(Hi.) Tb* Companion of S. Paul who wrote the Ads and the 
Third Gospel was S. Luke. 

Of the companions of S. Paul whose names are known to us 
no one is so probable as S. Luke ; and the voice of the first eight 
centuries pronounces strongly for him and for no one else as the 
author of these two writings. 

If antiquity were silent on the subject, no more reasonable 
conjecture could be made than "Luke the beloved physician." 
He fulfils the conditions. Luke was the Apostle's companion 
during both die Roman imprisonments (CpL iv. 14; Philem. 24; 
2 Tim. iv, u), and may well have been his companion at other 
times. That he is not mentioned in the earlier groups of Epistles 
is no objection j for none of them coincide with the "we n sections 
in the Acts. Moreover, the argument from medical language, 
although sometimes exaggerated, is solid and helpful Both in 
the Acts and in the Third Gospel there are expressions which are 
distinctly medical; and there is also a good deal of language 
which is perhaps more common in medical writers than elsewhere. 
This feature does not amount to proof that the author was a 
physician ; still less can it prove that, if the author was a physician, 
he must have been Luke. The Apostle might have had another 
medical companion besides the beloved physician. But, seeing 
that there is abundance of evidence that Luke was the writer of 
these two documents, the medical colour which is discernible here 
and there in the language of each of them is a valuable con- 
firmation of the evidence which assigns the authorship of both to 


For the voice of antiquity is not silent on the subject ; and we 
are not left to conjecture. There is no need to argue whether 
Timothy, or Titus, or Silas, or some unnamed companion of the 
Apostle is more likely than S. Luke to have written these two 
books. The evidence, which is both abundant and strong, is 
wholly in favour of Luke. Until we reach the blundering state- 
ment in Photius near the end of the ninth century, there is no 
hint that any one ever thought of any person but Luke as the 
author of either treatise. Photius has this statement: "Some 
say that the writer of the Acts was Clement of Rome, others 
Barnabas, and others again Luke the Evangelist; but Luke 
himself decides the question, for at the beginning of his preface 
he mentions that another treatise containing the acts of the Lord 
had been composed by him" (Amfkil. Qu, 123). Here he seems 
to be transferring to the Acts conjectures which had been made 
respecting the Epistle to the Hebrews. But at any rate the 
statement shows that the Third Gospel was regarded as un- 
questionably by Luke. 

The Pauline authorship of Romans and Galatians is now com- 
monly regarded as certain, and the critic who questions it is held 
to stultify himself. But is not the evidence for the Lucan author* 
ship of the Third Gospel and the Acts equally strong? If these 
are not named by any writer earlier than Irenseus, neither are 
those Epistles. And the silence of the Apostolic Fathers respect- 
ing the Third Gospel and the Acts is even more intelligible than 
their silence respecting Galatians and Romans, because the two 
former, being addressed to Theophilus, were in the first instance 
of the nature of private writings, and because, as regards the 
Gospel narrative, the oral tradition still sufficed But from 
Irenseus onwards the evidence in all these cases is full and 
unwavering, and it comes from all quarters of the Christian 
world. And in considering this third point, the first point must 
be kept steadily in view, viz. the certainty that the Third Gospel 
and the Acts were written by one and the same person. Con- 
sequently all the evidence for either book singly is available for 
the other book. Every writer who attributes the Third Gospel 
to Luke thereby attributes the Acts to Luke and vice versd, 
whether he know anything about the second book or not Thus 
in favour of Luke as the author of the Third Gospel we have 
three classes of witnesses : viz. those who state that Luke wrote 
the Third Gospel, those who state that Luke wrote the Acts, and 
those who state that he wrote both treatises. Their combined 
testimony is very strong indeed ; and there is nothing against it 
At the opening of his commentary on the Acts, Chrysostom says 
that many in his day were ignorant of the authorship and even of 
the existence of the book (Migne, Ix. 13). But that statement 


creates no difficulty. Many could be found at the present day, 
even among educated Christians, who could not name the author 
of the Acts. And we have seen that the late and confused state- 
ment in Photius, whatever it may mean respecting the Acts, 
testifies to the universal conviction that the Third Gospel was 
written by Luke. 

But we obtain a very imperfect idea of the early evidence in 
favour of the Third Gospel when we content ourselves with the 
statement that it is not attributed to Luke by any one before 
Irenseus and the Muratorian Fragment, which may be a little 
earlier than the work of Irenaeus, but is probably a little later. 
We must consider the evidence of the existence of this Gospel 
previous to Inenaeus ; and also the manner in which he himself 
and those who immediately follow him speak of it as the work of 
S. Luke. 

That Justin Martyr used the Third Gospel (or an authority 
which was practically identical with it) cannot be doubted. He 
gives a variety of particulars which are found in that Gospel 
alone ; e.g. Elizabeth as the mother of the Baptist, the sending of 
Gabriel to Mary, the census under Quirinius, there being no room 
in the inn, His ministry beginning when Jesus was thirty years 
old, His being sent by Pilate to Herod, His last cry, " Father, into 
Thy hands I commend My spirit M (i AfoL xxxiv. ; Try. IxxviiL, 
Ixxxviii,, c., ciii., cv., cvi). Moreover, Justin uses expressions 
respecting the Agony, the Resurrection, and the Ascension which 
show that the Third Gospel is in his mind. 

That his pupil Tatian possessed this Gospel is proved by the 
Diatessaron, See Hemphill, Diatessaron of Tatian, pp. 3 ff. 

Celsus also knew the Third Gospel, for he knew that one of 
the genealogies made Jesus to be descended from the first man 
(Orig. Con. Cels. ii. 32). 

The Clementine Homilies contain similarities which are pro 
ably allusions (iii. 63, 65, xi. 20, 23, xviL 5, xviii. 16, xix. 2). 

The Third Gospel was known to Basilides and Valentinus, and 
was commented upon by Heradeon (Clem. Alex. Strom, iv. 9, 
p. 596, ed. Potter). 

Marcion adopted this Gospel as the basis for what he called 
the " Gospel of the Lord" or " Gospel of Christ" He omitted a 
good deal as being inconsistent with his own teaching, but he 
does not appear to have added anything. 1 See 7 ; also Wsctt, 
Int. to Gospels, App. D j Sanday, Gospels in the Second Century, 

In the Epistle of the Churches of Lyons and Vienne to the 
Churches in Asia there is a quotation of Lk. i. 6 (Eus. H*E. v. i. 9). 

1 What Pseudo-TerL says of Cerdo is perhaps a mere transfer to Cerdo of 

what is known of Marcion. 


These instances, which are by no means exhaustive, may suffice 
as evidence for the early existence of the Third Gospel. It re- 
mains to notice the way in which Irenseus and his later contem- 
poraries speak of the book. Irenaeus, who represents the traditions 
of Asia Minor and Rome and Gaul in the second half of the 
second century, quotes it many times and quotes from nearly every 
chapter, especially from those which are wholly or in the main 
peculiar to this Gospel, e.g. i., ii., ix.-xix., xxiv. In a very remark* 
able passage he collects together many of the things which this 
Gospel alone narrates and definitely assigns them to Luke : " Now 
if any one reject Luke, as if he did not know the truth, he will 
manifestly be casting out the Gospel of which he claims to be a 
disciple. For very many and specially necessary elements of the 
Gospel we know through him, as the generation of John, the 
history of Zacharias, the coming of the angel to Mary," etc. etc. 
(iii. 14. 3. Comp. iii. 10. i, 22. 4, 12. 12, 14. 4, etc.). It will be 
observed that he does not contemplate the possibility of any one 
denying that Luke was the author. Those who may reject it will 
do so as thinking that Luke's authority is inadequate; but the 
authorship is unquestioned. 

Clement of Alexandria (A.D. 190-202) had had teachers from 
Greece, Egypt, Assyria, Palestine, and had received the tradition 
handed down from father to son from the Apostles (Strom, i. i, 
p. 322, ed. Potter). He quotes the Gospel very frequently, and 
from many parts of it He definitely assigns it to Luke (Strom, 
i 21, p. 407, ecL Potter). 

Tertullian (A.D. 190-220) speaks for the African Church. He 
not only quotes the Gospel frequently in his other works, but in 
his treatise against Marcion he works through the Gospel from 
ch. iv. to the end, often calling it Luke's. 

The Muratorian Fragment (A.D. 170-200) perhaps represents 
Rome. The first line of the mutilated Catalogue probably refers 
to S. Mark ; but the next seven unquestionably refer to S. Luke, 
who is twice mentioned and is spoken of as medicus. (See Lft on 
Supernatural Religion^ p. 189.) 

It would be waste of time to cite more evidence. It is mani- 
fest that in all parts of the Christian world the Third Gospel had 
been recognized as authoritative before the middle of the second 
century, and that it was universally believed to be the work of 
S, Luke. No one speaks doubtfully on the point The possibility 
of questioning its value is mentioned ; but not of questioning its 
nuthorship. In the literature of that period it would not be easy 
to find a stronger case. The authorship of the four great Epistles 
of S. Paul is scarcely more certain. In all these cases, as soon as 
we have sufficient material for arriving at a conclusion, the evidence 
is found to be all on one side and to be decisive. And exactly 


the same result is obtained when the question is examined as to 
the authorship of the Acts, as Bishop Lightfoot has shown (art 
" Acts " in D.B?\ Both the direct and the indirect argument for 
the Lucan authorship is very strong. 

With this large body of historical evidence in favour of S. Luke 
before us, confirmed as it is by the medical expressions in both 
books, it is idle to search for another companion of S. Paul who 
might have been the author. Timothy, Sopater, Aristarchus, 
Secundus, Gaius, Tychicus, and Trophimus are all excluded by 
Acts xx. 4, 5. And it is not easy to make Silas fit into the " we " 
sections. Titus is possible : he can be included in the " we " and 
the "us" without contradiction or difficulty. But what is gained 
by this suggestion? Is a solution which is supported by no evi- 
dence to be preferred to an intrinsically more probable solution, 
which is supported by a great deal of evidence, and by evidence 
which is as early as we can reasonably expect ? 

Those who neglect this evidence are bound to explain its 
existence. Irenseus, Clement, and Tertullian, to say nothing of 
other authorities, treat the Lucan authorship as a certainty. So far 
as their knowledge extends, Luke is everywhere regarded as the 
writer. How did this belief grow up and spread, if it was not 
true ? There is nothing in either treatise to suggest Luke, and he 
is not prominent enough in Scripture to make him universally 
acceptable as a conjecture. Those who wanted apostolic authority 
for their own views would have made their views more conspicuous 
in these books, and would have assigned the books to a person of 
higher position and influence than the beloved physician, e.g. to 
Timothy or Titus, if not to an Apostle. As Renan says, " There 
is no very strong reason for supposing that Luke was not the 
author of the Gospel which bears his name. Luke was not yet 
sufficiently famous for any one to make use of his name, to give 
authority to a book" (Les J-tvangiles, ch. xiii. p. 252, Eng. tr. 
p. 132). "The placing of a celebrated name at the head of a 
work . . . was in no way repugnant to the custom of the times. 
But to place at the head of a document a false name and an 
obscure one withal, that is inconceivable, . . . Luke had no place 
in tradition, in legend, in history" (Les Afdtres^ p. xvii., Eng. tr. 
p. n). 1 

1 Even Jillicher still talks of " the silence of Papias " as an objection (Einl. 
tn das N* 71 27, 3, Leipzig, 1894). In the case of a writer of whose work 
only a few fragments are extant, how can we know what was not mentioned m 
the much larger portions which have perished? The probabilities, in the 
absence of evidence, are that Papias did write of Luke. But we are not quite 
without evidence. In the " Hexsemeron " of Anastasius of Sinai is a passage m 
which Papias is mentioned as an ancient interpreter, and in which Lk. x. 1 8 is 
quoted in illustration of an interpretation. Possibly the illustration is borrowed 
from Papias. Lft Supernatural Religion, pp. 186, 200. Hilgenfeld thinks 



The name Lucas is probably an abbreviation of Lucanus, but 
possibly of Lucilius, or Lucius, or Lucianus. There is, however, 
no froof that Lucanus was shortened into Lucas l Nevertheless 
some of the oldest Latin MSS. (eg. Corbeiensts and Vercellensis) 
have secundum Lucanum as the title of the Third Gospel. Lucas, 
like Apollos, Artemas, Demas, Hennas, and Nymphas, is a form 
not found in classical literature, whereas Lucanus is common in 
inscriptions. Lobeck has noticed that these contracted proper 
names in -as are common in the case of slaves (Patholog. Proleg* 
p, 506). Slaves were sometimes physicians, and S. Luke may 
have been a freedman. Antistius, the surgeon of Julius Caesar, 
and Antonms Musa, the physician of Augustus, were freedmen. 

That Lucas = Lucanus is probable. 1 But that Lucanus =Silvanus, because 
luus=$tlva> and that therefore Luke and Silas are the same person (Van 
Vloten), looks like a caricature of critical ingenuity. ^ Equally grotesque is the 
idea that Luke is the Aristion of Papias (Eus. H. . iii 39. 4, 6), because <fyn<r- 
refair = lucere ( Lange). 

Only in three places is Lk. named in Scripture ; and it is worth 
noting that in all three of them the other Evangelist who is not an 
Apostle is named with him (CoL iv. ro, 14 ; Philem. 24 ; 2 Tim. 
iv. n). These passages tell us that "the physician, the beloved 
one" (6 tar/oos 6 dya-m/ros), 8 was with S. Paul during the first 
Roman imprisonment, when the Epistles to the Colossians and to 
Philemon were written, and also during the second imprisonment, 
when 2 Timothy was written. Besides telling us that Luke was a 
physician very dear to the Apostle, they also tell us that he was his 
" fellow-worker " in spreading the Gospel But apparently he was 
not his "fellow-prisoner." In CoL iv. 10 Aristarchus is called 
owcuxftoXcoTos, and in Philem. 23 Epaphras is called such ; but LL 
in neither place. 

Almost all critics are agreed that in CoL iv. 14 Luke is 

that the preface to Papias shows that he was acquainted with the preface 
to Luke. Salmon is disposed to agree with him (Intr, p* 90, d. 5). 

\ The argument from the Greek form (that Aewtaro'r, not Aowrav&, is the 
equivalent of Lucanus) is inconclusive. After about A.D. 50 forms in Aov*~ 
begin to take the place of forms in Aev/c-. 

3 Comp. Annas for Ananus ; Apollos for Apollomus (Codex Bezae, Act* 
xviu. 24) ; Artemas for Artemidorus (Tit in. 12 ; Mart. v. 40) ; Cleopes fox 
Cleopatros; Demas for Demetrius, Demarchus for Demaratus> Nymphas for 
Nymphodorus, Zenas for Zenodorus, and possibly Hennas for tfennodonis. 
For other examples see Win. XVL 5, p, 127 ; Lft. on CoL iv, 15 ; Chandler, 
Grk Accent. 34. 

8 Marcion omitted these words, perhaps became he thought that an Evan- 
gelist ought not to devote himself to anything so contemptible u the hmtnan 
body ( Texte und Unten* viii 4, p, 40), 


separated from * ' those of the circumcision, " and therefore was a 
Gentile Christian. 1 Hofmann, Tiele, and Wittichen have not suc- 
ceeded in persuading many persons that the passage does not 
necessarily imply this. Whether he was a Jewish proselyte before 
he was a Christian must remain uncertain: his knowledge of 
Jewish affairs and his frequent Hebraisms are no proof. That he 
was originally a heathen may be regarded as certain. He is the 
only one of the Evangelists who was of Gentile origin ; and, with 
the exception of his companion S. Paul, and possibly of Apollos, 
he was the only one among the first preachers of the Gospel who 
had had scientific training. 

If Luke was a Gentile, he cannot be identified with Lucius, 
who sends a salutation from Corinth to Rome (Rom. xvL 21). This 
Lucius was Paul's kinsman, and therefore a Jew. The identifica- 
tion of Luke with Lucius of Cyrene (Acts xiiL i) is less impossible. 
But there is no evidence, and we do not even know that Lucas 
was ever used as an abbreviation of Lucius. In Apost. Const 
vi. 1 8. 5 Luke is distinguished from Lucius. Nor can he be iden- 
tified with Silas or Silvanus, who was evidently a Jew (Acts xv. 22). 
Nor can a Gentile have been one of the Seventy, a tradition which 
seems to have been adopted by those who made Lk. x. 1-7 the 
Gospel for S. Luke's Day. The tradition probably is based solely 
on the fact that Luke alone records the Mission of the Seventy 
(Epiph. H&r. ii. 51. n, Migne, xli. 908). The same reason is fatal 
to Theophylact's attractive guess, which still finds advocates, that 
Lk. was the unnamed companion of Cleopas in the walk to 
Emmaus (xxiv. 13), who was doubtless a Jew (vv. 27, 32). The 
conjecture that Luke was one of the Greek proselytes who applied 
to Philip to be introduced to Christ shortly before His Passion 
(Jn. xii. 20) is another conjecture which is less impossible, but is 
without evidence. In common with some of the preceding guesses 
it is open to the objection that Luke, in the preface to his Gospel, 
separates himself from those " who from the beginning were eye- 
witnesses and ministers of the word " (i. 2). The Seventy, these 
Greeks, and the companion of Cleopas were eye-witnesses, and 
Lk. was not. In the two latter cases it is possible to evade this 
objection by saying that Luke means that he was not an eye-witness 
from the beginning, although at the end of Christ's ministry he 
became such. But this is not satisfactory. He claims to be 
believed because of the accuracy of his researches among the best 

1 Of the six who send greetings, the first three (Aristarchus, Mark, Jesus 
Justus) are doubly bracketed together : (i) as oi &T & reptro/n?*, (2) as p,6voi 
trwtprfol efr rljr /ftwtXefcur roD 6eo0, i.e. the only Jewish converts in Home who 
loyally supported S. Paul* The second three (Epaphras, Luke, Demas) are not 
bracketed together. In Philem. 23 Epaphras is (ruvcux/wiXwrof, and Mark, 
Aristarchui, Demas, and Luke are ol wvcpyoL ;iou, while Justus is not men- 


authorities. Had he himself been an eye-witness of any portion, 
would he not have let us know this ? Why did he not use the first 
person, as in the "we" sections in the Acts? He belongs to the 
second generation of Christians, not to the first 

It is, however, possible that Chrysostom and the Collect for 
S. Luke's Day are right in identifying "the brother whose praise 
in the Gospel is spread through all the Churches" (2 Cor. viii, 18) 
with SL Luke. But the conjectures respecting this unnamed 
brother are endless ; and no more can be affirmed than that Luke 
is a reasonable conjecture. 

The attempt to show that the writer of the Thiid Gospel and the Acts is a 
Jew is a failure ; and the suggestion that he is S. Paul is absurd. See below 
( 5) for evidence that our Evangelist is a Gentile writing for Gentiles* 

Besides the three passages in the Pauline Epistles and the 
preface to the Gospel, there are three passages of Scripture which 
tell us something about S. Luke, viz. the " we " sections. The first 
of these (Acts xvi. 10-17) tells us that during the second missionary 
journey Luke accompanied Paul from Troas to Philippi (A.D. 5 1 or 
52), and thus brings the physician to the Apostle about the time 
when his distressing malady (2 Cor. xii. 7) prostrated him in Galatia, 
and thereby led to the conversion of the Galatians (Gal. iv. 13-15). 
Even without this coincidence we might believe that the relation 
of doctor to patient had something to do with drawing Luke to 
the afflicted Apostle, and that in calling him " the physician, the 
beloved one," the Apostle is not distinguishing him from some 
other Luke, but indicating the way in which the Evangelist earned 
his gratitude. The second section (xx. 5~xxi. 18) tells us that about 
six years later (A.D. 58), during the third missionary journey, Luke 
was again at Philippi l with Paul, and went with him to Jerusalem 
to confer with James and the elders. And the third (xxvii. i- 
xxviii. 1 6) shows that he was with him during the voyage and 
shipwreck until the arrival in Rome. 

With these meagre notices of him in the N.T. our knowledge 
of Luke ends. We see him only when he is at the side of his 
magister and illuminator (Tertull. Adv. Marcion. iv. 2)8. Paul. 
That he was with the Apostle at other times also we can hardly 
doubt, insepardbilisfuit a Paulo, says Irenseus : but how often he 
was with him, and in each case for how long a time, we have no 
means of knowing. Tertullian perhaps means us to understand 
that Luke was converted to the Gospel by Paul, and this is in itself 
probable enough. And it is not improbable that it was at Tarsus. 

1 Renan conjectures that Luke was a native of Philippi. Ramsays takes the 
tame view, suggesting that the Macedonian whom S. Paul saw m a vision (Acts 
xvi* 9) was Luke himself, whom he had just met for the first time at Treat 
(& Paul the Traveller , p. 202)* 


where there was a school of philosophy and literature rivalling 
those of Alexandria and Athens (Strabo, xiv. 5. 13), that they first 
met. Luke may have studied medicine at Tarsus. Nowhere else 
in Asia Minor could he obtain so good an education : faXoaroQiav 
/cat T. aXkyv TOtSctav ey/cv/cXtov aira<rav (/.<:.). Our earliest authori- 
ties appear to know little or nothing beyond what can be found in 
Scripture or inferred from it (Iren. L i. i, 10. i, 14. 1-4, 15. i, 
22. 3; Canon Murator. sub init. ; Clem. Alex. Strom, v. 12 sub 
fin.; Tert. Adv. Marcion. iv. 2). Nor can much that is very 
trustworthy be gleaned from later writers. The statement of 
Eusebius (If. E. iii. 4. 7) and of Jerome (De vir. ill. vii.), which 
may possibly be derived from Julius Africanus (Harnack, Texte 
und Unters. viii. 4, p, 39), and is followed by Theophylact, Euthy- 
mius Zigabenus, and Nicephorus, that Luke was by family of 
Antioch in Syria, is perhaps only an inference from the Acts. 
AouKas 8 TO /iy y/os &v r&v far "Avrtoxewts (Eus.) need not mean 
more than that Luke had a family connexion with Antioch ; but it 
hardy "amounts to an assertion that Luke was not an Antiochian." 
Jerome says expressly Lucas medicus Antiockensis. This is probable 
in itself and is confirmed by the Acts. Of only one of the deacons 
are we told to which locality he belonged, " Nicolas a proselyte of 
Antioch " (vi. 5) * : and we see elsewhere that the writer was well 
acquainted with Antioch and took an interest in it (xi. 19-27, 
riii. i, xiv. 19, 21, 36, xv. 22, 23, 30, 35, xviii 22). 

Kpiphanius states that Luke ** preached in Dalmatia and Gallia, in Italy and 
Macedonia, but first in Gallia, as raul says of some of his companions, in his 
Epistles, Crescent in Gallia, for we are not to read in Galatia, as some errone- 
ously think, but in Gallia " (ffmr. ii. 51. 11, Migne, xli. 908) ; and Oecumenius 
says that Luke went from Rome to preach in Africa. Jerome believes that his 
bones were translated to Constantinople, 8 and others give Achaia or Bithynia as 
the place of his death. Gregory Nazianzen, in giving an off-hand list of primi- 
tive martyrs Stephen, Peter, Andrew, etc. places Luke among them (Orat. 
mdo. Jul. i. 79). None of these statements are of any value. 

The legend which makes Luke a painter is much more ancient 
than is sometimes represented, Nicephorus Callistus (H. E. il 43) 
in the fourteenth century is by no means the earliest authority for 
it Omitting Simeon Metaphrastes (c. A.D. noo) as doubtful, the 
Menology of the Emperor Basil IL, drawn up A.D. 980, represents 

1 It has been noted that of eight narratives of the Russian campaign of 
1812, three English, three French, and two Scotch, only the last (Alison and 
Scott) state that the Russian General Barclay de Tolly was of Scotch 

* His words are : Scpultus est Comtantinopoli [vixit octoginta et quatuox 
annos, uxorem non habens] ad quam urbem mccsimo Constantii anno ossa qus 
cum rtUqutis Andrea apostoh translata sunt [de Achaia]. The words in 
bcackets are not genuine, but are sometimes quoted as such. The first insertion 
is made in more than one place in A vir. ill. vii. 


S. Luke as painting the portrait of the Virgin. The oldest witness, 
however, is Theodorus Lector, reader in the Church of Constantin- 
ople in the sixth century. Some place him as late as the eighth 
century; but the name is common, and between A.D. 500 and 8oc 
there may have been many readers of that name t Constantinople 
He says that the Empress Eudoxia found at Jerusalem a picture of 
the co/^Twp painted by Luke the Apostle, and sent it to Constantin- 
ople as a present to her daughter Pulcheria, wife of Theodosius n. 
(Cottectan. L 7, Migne, Pair. Gr. Ixxxvi. 165). In 1204 this 
picture was brought to Venice. In the Church of S. Maria 
Maggiore at Rome, in the Capeila Paolina, is a very ancient picture 
of the Virgin ascribed to S. Luke. It can be traced back to 
A.D. 847, and may be still older. 1 But although no such legend 
seems to be known to Augustine, for he says, neque novimusfaciem 
virginis Manx (De Trin. viii. 5. 7), yet it is many centuries older 
than Nicephorus (Kraus, Real-Enc. d. Christ. Alt. ii. p. 344, which 
quotes Glukselig, Christus-ArchaoL 101; Grimouard deS, Laurent, 
Guide de Fart chret. iii, 15-20). And the legend has a strong ele- 
ment of truth. It points to the great influence which Luke has 
had upon Christian art, of which in a real sense he may be called 
the founder. The Shepherd with the Lost Sheep on His shoulders, 
one of the earliest representations of Christ, comes from Lk. xv 
(Tert. De Pud. vii. and x.) : and both medieval and modern artists 
have been specially fond of representing those scenes which are 
described by S. Luke alone : the Annunciation, the Visit of Mary 
to Elizabeth, the Shepherds, the Manger, the Presentation in the 
Temple, Symeon and Anna, Christ with the Doctors, the Woman 
at the Supper of Simon the Pharisee, Christ weeping over Jeru- 
salem, the Walk to Emmaus, the Good Samaritan, the Prodigal 
Son. Many other scenes which are favourites with painters might 
be added from the Acts. See below, 6. i. d 

The four symbolical creatures mentioned in Ezek. L and Rev. 
iv., the Man, the Lion, the Ox, and the Eagle, are variously ex- 
plained by different writers from Irenseus (iiL i x. 8) downwards. 
But all agree in assigning the Ox or Calf to S. Luke. "This 
sacerdotal animal implies Atonement and Propitiation; and this 
exactly corresponds with what is supposed to be the character of 
St, Luke's Gospel, as one which more especially conveys mercy to 
the Penitent ... It begins with the Priest, dwelling on the 
Priestly family of the Baptist ; and ends with the Victim, in our 
Lord's death 19 (Isaac Williams, On tJu Study of the Gosptk, 
Pt L sect vL). 

1 For an interesting account of this famoui picture, and of others attributed 
to the Evangelist^ see Tk* Madonna tf & Zfe, by H. L Boltou, Pmtnjun, 



The idea of a special revelation to the Evangelist is excluded 
by the prologue to the Gospel : his narrative is the result of care* 
ful enquiry in the best quarters. But (a) which "eye-witnesses 
and ministers of the word" were his principal informants, 
(S) whether their information was mostly oral or documentary, 
(c) whether it was mostly in Aramaic or in Greek, are questions 
about which he is silent Internal evidence, however, will carry 
us some way in finding an answer to them. 

(a) During a large portion of the time in which he was being 
prepared, and was consciously preparing himself, for writing a 
Gospel, he was constantly with S. Paul ; and we may be sure that, 
it was among S* Paul's companions and acquaintances that Luke 
obtained much of his information. It is probable that in this way 
he became acquainted with some of the Twelve, with other 
disciples of Christ, and with His Mother and brethren. He 
certainly was acquainted with S. Mark, who was perhaps already 
preparing material for his own Gospel when he and S. Luke were 
with the Apostle in Rome (Col. iv. 10, 14 ; Philem. 24). S. Paul 
himself could tell Luke only that which he himself received (i Cor. 
xv. 3) ; but he could help him to first-hand information. While 
the Apostle was detained in custody at Csesarea, Luke would be 
able to do a good deal of investigation, and as a physician he would 
perhaps have access to people of position who could help him. 

(b) In discussing the question whether the information was 
given chiefly in an oral or a documentary form, we must remember 
that the difference between oral tradition and a document is not 
great, when the oral tradition has become stereotyped by frequent 
repetition. A document cannot have much influence on a writer 
who already knows its contents by heart. Luke tells us that many 
documents were already in existence, when he decided to write ; 
and it is improbable that he made no use of these. Some of his 
sources were certainly documents, e& the genealogy (iii. 23-38) : 
and we need not doubt that the first two chapters are made up of 
written narratives, of which we can see the conclusions at L 80, 
ii. 40, and ii. 52. The early narrative (itself perhaps not primary), 
of which all three Synoptists make use, and which constitutes the 
main portion of S. Mark's Gospel, was probably already in writing 
when Lk. made use of it. S. Luke may have had the Second 
Gospel itself, pretty nearly in the form in which we have it, and 
may include the author of it among the iroAAot' (i. x). But sonw 
phenomena are rather against this. Luke omits (vL 5) "the 
sabbath was made for man, and not man for the saobath" (Mk. 
ii. 27), He omits the whole of ML vi. 45-viii 9, which contains 


the digression into the borders of Tyre and Sidon and the incident 
with the Syrophenician woman, which is also in Matthew 
(xv. 21-28). And all this would have been fall of interest to 
Luke's Gentile readtrs. That he had our First Gospel is much 
less probable. There is so much that he would have been likely 
to appropriate if he had known it, that the omission is most easily 
explained by assuming that he did not know it He omits the 
visit of the Gentile Magi (Mt. ii. 1-15). At xx. 17 he omits 
" Therefore I say to you, The kingdom of God shall be taken away 
from you, and shall be given to a nation bringing forth the fruits 
thereof" (Mt xxi. 43). At xxi. 12-16 he omits "And this gospel 
of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world for a testimony 
unto all the nations'" (Mt xxiv. 14 ; comp. Mk. xiii. 10). Comp. 
the omission of Mt xvii. 6, 7 at Lk. ix, 35, of Mt xvii. 19, 20 at 
Lk. ix, 43, of Csesarea Philippi (Mt xvi. 13 ; ML viil 27) at Lk. 
ix. 1 8 ; and see p. xlL Both to S. Luke and his readers such 
things would have been most significant Again, would Luke have 
left the differences between his own Gospel and that of Matthew as 
they are, if he had been aware of them ? Contrast Mt ii. 14, 15 
with Lk. ii. 39, Mt xxviii. 7, 10, 16 with Lk. xxiv. 49; and gener- 
ally mark the differences between the narratives of the Nativity and 
of the Resurrection in these two Gospels, the divergences in the 
two genealogies, the "eight days " (Lk.) and the "six days " (Mt 
and Mk.) at the Transfiguration, and the perplexing phenomena in 
the Sermon on the Mount These points lead us to the conclusion 
that Lk. was notfam'fiar with our First Gospel, even if he knew it 
at all. But, besides the early narrative, which seems to have been 
nearly coextensive with our Second Gospel, Matthew and Luke 
used the same collection, or two similar collections, of " Oracles " 
or " Sayings of the Lord " ; and hence the large amount of matter, 
chiefly discourses, which is common to Matthew and Luke, but is 
not found in Mark. This collection, however, can hardly have 
been a single document, for the common material is used very 
differently by the two Evangelists, especially as regards arrange- 
ment 1 A Book of " Oracles " must not be hastily assumed. 

In addition to these two main sources, (i) the narrative of 
events, which he shares with Matthew and Mark, and (2) the 
collection of discourses, which he shares with Matthew ; and be- 
sides (3) the smaller documents about the Infancy incorporated 
in the first two chapters, which are peculiar to himself, Luke 

1 There are a few passages which are common to Mark and Luke, but are 
not found m Matthew : the Demoniac (Mk. i. 23-28 Lk. iv. 33-37} ; 
the Journey in Galilee (Mk. L 35-39 - Lk. iv. 42-44} ; the Request of the 
Demoniac (Mk. v. 18 Lk. vni. 38) ; the Complaint of John against the 
Caster out of Demons (Mk. ix. 38 = Lk. ix. 49) ; the Spices brought to the 
Tomb (Mk. xvi. i = Lk. xxiv. j). Are these the result of the um* when 
S. Mark and S. Luke were together (CoL iv. 10, 14 ; Philem* 24} ? 


evidently had (4) large sources of information respecting the 
Ministry, which are also peculiar to himself. These are specially 
prominent in chapters ix. to xix. and in xxiv. But it must not be 
forgotten that the matter which S. Luke alone gives us extends over 
the whole range of Christ's life, so far as we have any record of 
it. It is possible that some of these sources were oral, and it is 
probable that one of them was connected with the court of Herod 
(iii. i, 19, viii. 3, ix, 7-9, xiiL 31, xxiii. 7-12 ; Acts xiii. i). But 
we shall probably not be wrong if we conjecture that most of this 
material was in writing before Luke made use of it 

It is, however, begging the question to talk of an " Ebionitic 
source." First, is there any Ebionism in S. Luke? And secondly, 
does what is called Ebionism in him come from a portion of his 
materials, or wholly from himself? That Luke is profoundly im- 
pressed by the contrasts between wealth and poverty, and that, 
like S. James, he has great sympathy with the suffering poor and 
a great horror of the temptations which beset all the rich and to 
which many succumb, is true enough. But this is not Ebionism. 
He nowhere teaches that wealth is sinful, or that rich men must 
give away all their wealth, or that the wealthy may be spoiled by 
the poor. In the parable of Dives and Lazarus, which is sup- 
posed to be specially Ebionitic, the rich Abraham is in bliss with 
the beggar, and Lazarus neither denounces on earth the super- 
fluity of Dives, nor triumphs in Hades over the reversal of posi- 
tions. The strongest saying of Christ against wealth, " It is easier 
for a camel to go through a needle's eye, than for a rich man to 
enter into the Kingdom of God " is in Matthew (xix. 24) and Mark 
(x. 25) as well as in Luke (xviiL 25). So also is the story of Peter 
and Andrew, James and John leaving their means of life and 
following Christ (Mt iv. 18-22 ; Mk. L 16-20; Lk. v. i-n). So 
also is the story of Matthew or Levi leaving his lucrative calling to 
follow Christ (Mt. ix. 9 ; Mk. ii. 14 \ Lk. v. 27, a8X In both these 
cases Luke expressly states that they forsook all (v, 1 1, 28), which, 
however, is sufficiently clear from the other narratives. In the 
story about Zacchseus, which is peculiar to Luke, this head tax- 
collector retains half his great wealth, and there is no hint that he 
ought to have surrendered the whole of it Elsewhere we find 
touches in the other Gospels which are not in Luke, but which 
would no doubt have been considered Ebionitic, if they had been 
found in Luke and not in the others. Thus, in the description of 
the Baptist, it is Matthew (iii. 4) and Mark (i 6) who tell us of 
John's ascetic clothing and food, about which Luke is silent In 
the parable of the Sower it is the others (Mt. xiiL 22 ; Mk. iv. 19) 
who speak of " the deccitfulness of riches," while Luke (viii 14) has 
simply "riches." It is they who record (Mt xix. 29 ; ML x. 29) 
that Christ spoke of the blessedness of leaving relations and pro* 


(Aypoife) for His sake, where Luke (xviil 29) omits 
He alone preserves Christ's declaration that he who sits at meat 
is superior to him who serves (xxii. 27), and there is no hint that 
to have servants is wrong. While the others tell us that Joseph 
of Arimathsea was a man of rank (Mk. xv. 43) and wealth (Mt 
xxvil 57), Luke is much more explicit than they are about his 
goodness and rectitude (xxiii 50, 51), which does not look like 
prejudice against the rich- And it is Luke alone who tells us of 
the women, presumably well-to-do, who " ministered unto them of 
their substance" (viii. 3). To which may perhaps be added the 
fact that in the quotation from Ps. cvii. 10 in Lk. i. 79 those "fast 
bound in poverty" (irrar)^) are omitted. Throughout the Third 
Gospel there is a protest against worldliness; but there is no 
protest against wealth. And there is no evidence that the protest 
against worldliness is due to some particular source from which he 
drew, and from which the others did not draw. Rather it is 
something in the writer himself, being apparent in the Acts, as 
well as in the Gospel ; and it shows itself, sometimes in what he 
selects from his materials, sometimes in the way in which he treats 
it As Jiilicher says, Man hat von dem ebionitischen charakter dieses 
Evang. gesfrochen und nach den judischen Etnflussen oder Quellen 
gesucht; sehr mit Unrecht* . . . Von tendenzioser Ebionitisirung 
des Evangeliums kann bet ihm nicht die Rede sein (EM. 27, 
p. 206). 

(c) Frequent Hebraisms indicate that a great deal of Luke's 
material was originally in Aramaic. These features are specially 
common in the first two chapters. In translating Aramaic sources 
Luke would have ample opportunity for exhibiting his own pre- 
dilection for certain words, phrases, and constructions. If the 
materials were already in Greek when Luke made use of them, 
then he could and did somewhat alter the wording in appropriat- 
ing them. But it will generally be found that wherever the ex- 
pressions which are characteristic of him are less frequent than 
usual, there we have come upon material which is common to him 
and the others, and which he has adopted without much alteration. 
Thus the parable of the Sower (viii. 4-15) has few marks of his 
style (ev /Anp, ver. 7; 6 Xo'yos rov ou, ver. n; &'x oimM an( * 
a^wrravrat, ver. 13) which are not also in Mt (row cnrnpcu, ver. 5) 
or in both (o> r<3 cnra'pav, ver. 5), But absence or scarcity of 
Luke's characteristics is most common in those reports of dis- 
courses which are common to him and Matthew : eg. iiu 7-9, 17 * 
Mt. iii. 7-10, 12 ; vii. 6-9*=Mt viii. 8-10; ix, 57, s8*Mt viii. 19, 
20 ; vii. 22-28 Mt. XL 4-11 ; vii. 31-35 = Mt xi, i6-X9. This last 
passage is one of those which were excised by Marcion. As we 
might expect, there is much more variation between the Gospels 
in narrating the same facts than in reporting the same sayings; 


and the greater the variation, the greater the room for marks of 
individual style. But we cannot doubt that an immense amount 
of what Luke has in common with Matthew, or with both him 
and Mark, was already in a Greek form before he adopted it 
It is incredible that two or three independent translations should 
agree quite or almost word for word. 

It is very interesting to notice how, in narratives common to 
all three, individual characteristics appear: e.g. viiL 22-s6 = Mk. 
iv. 35-41, v. 1-43 = Mt TOO- 23-34, ix. 18-25. These narratives 
swarm with marks of Luke's style, although he keeps closely to 
the common material (see below, 6. ii.). Thus he has cla-ey irpos 
avrovs, efl-ioTara, Seo/iat <rov, IfcA^eH/ cwro, i/cavos, eSaro avrov, ow, 
vTrooT/oe^e, irapa TOVS TrdSas, Trapaxpypa, etc., where Mark has A,cye6 
avrots, St8ao7caA, op/cta ere, l^eXOclv CK, /*eya9, TrapeKoAei avrov, //.era, 
&rayc, wpos rovs iroSas, u0us, etc. Moreover Luke has iv T< 
& infin.y KCLI oSros, icat avros, vTra/o^ctv, was or aVas, ftovoyev^s, etc., 
where the others have nothing. The following examples will repay 
examination: iv. 38-41 =Mk. L 29-34 = Mt viii. 14-17; v. 12-16 
*=Mk. i. 4o-45 = Mt viii. 1-4; v. i7-2 = 6ML ii. 1-12== Mt ix. 
1-8; ix. 10-17 Mk. vL 3o-44Mt xiv. 13-21; ix. 38-4o = ML 
ix. 17, 18 = Mt. xvii. 15, 16 ; and many others. It is quite evident 
that in appropriating material Luke works it over with his own 
touches, and sometimes almost works it up afresh; and this is 
specially true of the narrative portion of the Gospel 

It is impossible to reach any certain conclusion as to the 
amount of material which he had at his disposal Some suppose 
that this was very large, and that he has given us only a small 
portion of it, selected according to the object which he is sup- 
posed to have had hi view, polemical, apologetic, conciliatory, 
or historical Others think that his aim at completeness is too 
conspicuous to allow us to suppose that he rejected anything 
which he believed to be authentic. Both these views are probably 
exaggerations. No doubt there are cases in which he deliberately 
omits what he knew well and did not question. And the reason 
for omission may have been either that he had recorded something 
very similar, or that the incident would be less likely to interest or 
edify Gentile readers. No doubt there are other cases in which 
the most natural explanation of the omission is ignorance : he does 
not record because he does not know. We know of a small amount 
which Mark alone records ; of a considerable amount which 
Matthew alone records; of a very considerable amount which 
John alone records; and of an enormous amount (Jn. xxi. 25) 
which no one records. To suppose that Luke knew the great 
part of this, and yet passed it over, is an improbable hypothesis. 
And to suppose that he knew scarcely any of it, is also improbable, 
Bat a definite estimate cannot be made. 


The statement that Luke avoids duplicates on principle has been 
made and accepted too hastily. It is quite possible that he has 
deliberately omitted some things, because of their similarity to 
others which he has recorded. It is possible that he has omitted 
the feeding of the 4000, because he has recorded the feeding of 
the 5000; and the anointing by Mary of Bethany, because of the 
anointing by the sinner; and the healing of the Syrophenician's 
daughter at a distance, because of the centurion's servant at a 
distance ; and the cursing of the barren fig-tree, because of the 
parable of the same ; and the mocking by Pilate's soldiers, because 
of the mocking by Herod's soldiers. But in many, or even most, 
of these cases some other motive may have caused the omission. 
On the other hand, we must look at the doublets and triplets 
which he has admitted. If he made it a rule to exclude duplicates, 
the exceptions are more numerous than the examples, and they 
extend all through the Gospel. 

The Mother of the Christ has a song (i. 46 ff.), and the father of 
the Baptist has a song (68 ff.). The venerable Simeon welcomes 
the infant Christ in the temple (ii. 28), and so does the venerable 
Anna (38). Levi the publican is converted and entertains Jesus 
(v. 27 ff.), and Zacchseus the publican also (xix. i ff.). The 
mission of the Twelve (ix. i) is followed by the mission of the 
Seventy (x. i). True disciples are equal to Christ's relations 
(viii. 21), and to His Mother (xi. 28). Twice there is a dispute as 
to who is the greatest (ix. 46, xxii. 24). Not content with the 
doublets which he has in common with Mt (viii. 19-22, ix. 16, 17, 
xxiv. 40, 41), he adds a third instance (ix. 61, 62, v. 39, xvii. 36?) ; 
or where Mt has only one example (xxiv. 37-39), he gives two 
(xvii. 26-29). So also in the miracles. We have the widow's son 
raised (vii. 14), and also Jairus' daughter (viii. 54), where no other 
Evangelist gives more than one example. There are two instances 
of cleansing lepers (v. 13, xvii. 14); two of forgiving sins (v. 20, 
vii. 48); three healings on the sabbath (vL 6, xiii. 10, xiv. i); 
four castings out of demons (iv. 35, viii. 29, ix. 42, xi. 14). Similar 
repetition is found in the parables. The Rash Builder is followed 
by the Rash King (xiv. 28-32), the Lost Sheep by the Ix>st Coin 
(xv. i-io) ; and the Friend at Midnight (xi. 5) does not involve 
the omission of the Unrighteous Judge (xviii. i). The exceptions 
to the supposed principle are still more numerous in the shorter 
sayings of Christ: viii. i6 = xi, 33; viii. i7 = xii. 2; viii. 18 *xi\". 
26, ix. 23=xiv. 27; ix. 24 = xvii. 33; ix, 26-xiL o; x. 25 = xviii. 18; 
xi. 43=* xx. 46; xii. n, iz xxi. 14, 15; xiv, n=- xviii. 14; 
xix. 44 = xxi. 6; and comp. xvii. 31 with xxi, 21, and xxL 23 
with xxiii. 29. These instances, which arc not exhaustive, suf- 
fice to show that the Evangelist cannot have had any very 
strong objection to recording duplicate instances of similar inci- 


dents and sayings. Could more duplicates be found in any other 

For recent (since 1885) discussions of the Synoptic problem see Badham, 
The Formation of the Gospels , 1891 ; Blair, The Apostolic Gospel, 1896 ; Jolley, 
The Synoptic Problem^ 1893 J Salmon, Historical Introduction to the Books oj 
theN.T.) 5th ed. 1891 ; Wnght, The Composition of the Gospels, 1890; Synopsis 
of the Gospels in Greek, 1896 ; Holsten, Die synopt. Evang. nach Form 
%hres Inhalts dargestellt, 1886 ; Holtzmann, Emleitung in das N. T. 1892 ; 
Jilhcher, Einl in das N.T* 1894 ; Nosgen, Geschichtejesu Christi, being Part 
i. of Gesck. der N.T. Offenbarung, 1891; H. H. Wendt, Die Lehre unddas 
Lebenjesu, 1885-1890. Other literature is mentioned on p. Ixxxv. 

See especially Sanday in Book by Book, 1893, P- 345 #; &"* of the 
Bible, 2nd ed. 1893, supplement to the article on " Gospels," pp. 1217-1243 ; 
and in the Expositor^ 4th series, Feb. to June, 1891. 


(i.) It is a disappointment that Bishop Lightfoofs admirable 

cle on the Acts (D.B? i. pp. 25-43) does not discuss the Date 
The Bishop told the present writer that he regarded the question 
of date as the province of the writer of the article on S. Luke, an 
article which has not yet been rewritten. The want has, how- 
ever, been to a large extent supplied in the Bampton Lectures for 
1893 (Lect. vi.), and we may safely accept this guidance. 

The main theories respecting the date of the Third Gospel 
contend respectively for a time in or near the years A.D. 100, A.D. 
80, and A.D. 63. 

(a) The strongest argument used by those who advocate a 
date near the close of the first century or early in the second * is 
the hypothesis that the author of the Third Gospel and of the 
Acts had read the Antiquities of Josephus, a work published about 
A.D. 94. But this hypothesis, if not absolutely untenable, is highly 
improbable. The coincidences between Luke and Josephus are 
not greater than might accidentally occur in persons writing in- 
dependently about the same facts; while the divergences are so 
great as to render copying improbable. At any rate Josephus 
must not be used both ways. If the resemblances are made to 
prove that Luke copied Josephus, then the discrepancies should 
not be employed to prove that Luke's statements are erroneous. 
If Luke had a correct narrative to guide him, why did he diverge 
from it only to make blunders? It is much more reasonable to 
suppose that where Luke differs from the Antiquities he had in- 
dependent knowledge, and that, he had never read Josephus. 
Moreover, where the statements of either can be tested, it is Luke 
who is commonly found to be accurate, whereas Josephus is often 

1 Among these are Baur, Davidson, Hilgenfeld, Jacobsen, Pfleiderer, Over- 
beck, Schwegler, Scholten, Volkmar, Weizsacker, Wittichen, and Zeller. The 
more moderate of these suggest A.D. 95-105, the more extreme A.D. 120-135, 


convicted of exaggeration and error. See the authorities cited bj 
Lft. D.B? p. 39; by Holtzmann, EinL in d. N.T. p. 374, 1892, 
and by Schanz, Comm. uber d. Evang. d. k. Lukas, p. 16, 1883. 

The relation of Luke to Josephus has recently been rediscussed ; on the one 
side by Clemen (Du Chronologic derpauhn. Brief e, Halle, 1893) and Krenkel 
(Josephus und Lukes; der schriftstcllenschc Einfiuss dcs judischen Gesckickt- 
schrabers oufden christlichen> Leipzig, 1894), who regard the use of Josephus 
by Luke as certain; on the other by Belser (Theol Quartalschnft, Tubingen, 
1895, 1896), who justly criticizes the arguments of these writers and especially 
of Krenkel. 1 It is childish to point out that Luke, like Josephus, uses such 
words as dffwrAXe^, d^tiwew-flcu, a&dveiv t iraidtov, r^Tfftv, vtXrj, x.r.X., in 
their usual sense : and such phrases as irpo&cnrrev TQ <ro0/a Kal TJKudq. (Lk. ii. 52) 
and Qlffrvrro rdrres ol djcotfojrres aflrov irl TQ etiveaet. KQ.\ rats airoKplffeffiv CLVTOV 
(ii. 47) are not strikingly similar to e/s pcydXriv iraidelas vpotiKoirrov Mdoffiv, 
lurflWj re xol <rv?l<ret SOK&V dtaQtyeiv (Jos. Vita, 2) and davfj&cras TTJV &Tr6Kpt<rur 
afo-oO ffo<fyv offrw ywofJLtvqv (Ant. xii. 4. 9). Far more striking resemblances 
may be found in writings which are indisputably independent, Luke alone in 
N.T. calls the Sea of Galilee ^ \Lfivn TevvTjffaptr. Could he not call it a lake 
without being prompted ? Josephus also calls it a Xfyiv??, but his designations 
all differ from Luke s : Tvvr)<r&p ^ Xfyw??, ^ X. PewTjcrd/), X. ^ rvyi7<ra/>tTij, j) 
Tevvijo-aptru X. (B. J. ii. 20. 6, ui. 10. 7 ; Ant. xvih. 2. I ; Vita t 65), and other 
vanations. Luke has rpo<r&re<rej> rots y6va<rw 'Iri<rov (v. 8), and Josephus has 
row y6va,(nif a5roD Tpotrirfoovres (Ant. xix. 3. 4). But Josephus more often 
writes Trpwrtirrew run vp&s T&, yfoara, and the more frequent^phrase would 
more probably have been borrowed. Comp. ffvvexontrri rvpery fttyd\(? (Lk. 
lv 3^5 with reraprattf irvperf <rv<rxe6sts (Ant. xiu, 15. 5) 5 M ptr*upLeff8e 
(xii. 29) with Ant. xvi. 4. 6, sub Jin. (where, however, yweurtpiffro is the more 
probable reading); AQarrot tytyero dir* avrw (xxiv. 31) with 

(Ant. xx. 8. 6). In these and many other cases the hypothesis of copying is 
wholly uncalled for. The expressions are not very uncommon. Some of them 
perhaps are the result of both Luke and Josephus being familiar with LXX. 
Others are words or constructions which are the common material of various 
Greek writers. Indeed, as Belser has shown, a fair case may be made out to 
show the influence of Thucydides on Luke. In a word, the theory that Luke 
had read Josephus " rests on little more than the fact that both writers relate 
or allude to the same events, though the differences between them are really 
more marked than the resemblances" (Sanday, Bampton Letur^ 1893, p. 
278). As Schtirer and Salmon put it, if Luke had read Josephus, he must 
very quickly have forgotten all that he read in him. 

In itself, the late date A.D. 100 is not incredible, even for those 
who are convinced that the writer is Luke, and that he never read 
Josephus, Luke may have been quite a young man, well under 
thirty, when he first joined S. Paul, A,D. 50-52 ; and he may have 
been living and writing at the beginning of the second century, 
But the late date has nothing to recommend it; and we may 
believe that both his writings would have assumed a different 
form, had they been written as late as this. Would not o Xptvrk, 
which is still a title and means " the Messiah w (5i. 26, JiS. 15, iv, 41, 
ix. 20, xx 41, xxii. 67, xxiii. 35, 39, xxiv. 26, 46), have become a 

1 F. Bole, Flavins Josephus liber Christus unddie 
Atierthumtrn y Brucen, 1896, defends the disputed passage about Christ (*viii* 
3. 3) rather than the independence of S* Luke, 


proper name, as in the Epistles? Would not o KV/JM*, as a 
designation of Jesus Christ, have been still more frequent? It is 
not found in Matthew or Mark (excepting in the disputed 
appendix) ; but it is the invariable designation in the Gospel of 
Peter. In Luke (vii. 13, x. i, xi. 39, xil 42, xiii. 15, xvii 5, 6, 
xviii. 6, xix. 8, xxii. 61, xxiv. 34) and in John this use is begin- 
ning, but it is still exceptional. Above all, would xxi. 32 have stood 
as it does, at a date when "this generation" had "passed away 1 ' 
without seeing the Second Advent? Moreover, the historical 
atmosphere of the Acts is not that of A.D. 95-135* In the Acts the 
Jews are the persecutors of the Christians; at this late date the 
Jews were being persecuted themselves. Lastly, what would have 
induced a companion of S. Paul^ whether Luke or not^ to wait so long 
before publishing the results of his researches t Opportunities of 
contact with those who had been eye-witnesses would have been 
rapidly vanishing during the last twenty years. 

() The intermediate date of A.D. 75-80 has very much 
more to recommend it. 1 It avoids the difficulties just men- 
tioned. ^It accounts for the occasional but not yet constant 
use of o Ku'/nos to designate Jesus. It accounts for the omis- 
sion of the very significant hint, "let him that readeth under- 
stand" (Mk. xiiL 14; Mt xxiv. 15). When the first two Gospels 
(or the materials common to both) were compiled, the predicted 
dangers had not yet come but were near; and each of these 
Evangelists warns his readers to be on the alert When the Third 
Gospel was written, these dangers were past. It accounts for the 
greater definiteness of the prophecies respecting the destruction of 
Jerusalem as given by Luke (xix. 43, 44, xxL 10-24), when com- 
pared with the records of them in Mark (xiii. 14-19) and Matthew 
(xxiv. 15-22). After the destruction had taken place the tradition 
of the prediction might be influenced by what was known to have 
happened; and this without any conscious tampering with the 
report of the prophecy. The possibility of this influence must be 
admitted, and with it a possibility of a date subsequent to A.D. 70 
for the Gospel and the Acts. Twice in the Gospel (viii. 51, ix. 28), 
as in the Acts (i. 13), Luke places John before his elder brother 
James, which Mt and Mk. never do; and this may indicate that 
Luke wrote after John had become the better known of the two. 
Above all, such a date allows sufficient time for the "many" to 
"draw up narratives " respecting the acts and sayings of Christ* 

1 Some year between A.D. 70 and 95 is advocated by Beyschlag, Bleek, 
Cook, Credner, De Wette, Ewald, Gilder, Holtzmann?, JUlicher, Keim?, 
Kbstlin, Lechler, Lekebusch, Mangold, Ramsay, Renan, Reuss, Sanday, 
Schenkel, Tnp, Tobler, Weiss, and others. And the more trustworthy of these, 
+g* Ramsay, Sanday, and Weiss, are disposed to make A.D. 80 the latest data 
that can reasonably be assigned to the Gospel, or even to the Acts. 


(^) The early date of about A.B. 63 still finds advocates; 1 and 
no doubt there is something to be said for it. Quite the simplest 
explanation of the fact that S. Paul's death is not recorded in the Acts 
is that it had not taken place. If that explanation is correct the 
Third Gospel cannot be placed much later than A.D. 63. Again, 
the writer of the Acts can hardly have been familiar with the 
Epistles to the Corinthians and the Galatians : otherwise he would 
have inserted some things and explained others (Salmon, Hist. 
Int. to JV.T. p. 319, ed. 5). How long might Luke have been 
without seeing these Epistles ? Easily till A.D. 63 ; but less easily 
till A.D, 80. Once more, when Luke records the prophecy of 
Agabus respecting the famine, he mentions that it was fulfilled 
(Acts xi. 28). When he records the prophecy of Christ respecting 
the destruction of Jerusalem ^xxi. 5-36), he does not mention that 
it was fulfilled. The simplest explanation is that the destruction 
had not yet taken place. And, if it be said that the prediction of 
it has been retouched in Luke's record in order to make it more 
distinctly in accordance with facts, we must notice that the words, 
" Let them that are in Judaea flee to the mountains? are in all three 
reports. The actual flight seems to have been, not to the moun- 
tains, but to Pella in north Peraea ; and yet " to the mountains " 
is still retained by Luke (xxi. 21). Eusebius says that there was 
a " revelation " before the war, warning the Christians not only to 
leave the city, but to dwell in a town called Pella (If. E. iii. 5, 3). 
This "revelation" is evidently an adaptation of Christ's prophecy; 
and here we reasonably suspect that the detail about Pella has been 
added after the event But there is nothing of it in Luke's report 

Nevertheless, the reasons stated above, and especially those 
derived from the prologue to the Gospel, make the intermediate 
date the most probable of the three. It combines the advantages 
of the other two dates and avoids the difficulties of both. It may 
be doubted whether any of the Gospels, as we have them, was 
written as early as A.D. 63 ; and if the Third Gospel is placed 
after the death of S. Paul, one main reason for placing it before 
A.D. 70 is gone. 

(ii.) As to the Place in which Luke wrote his Gospel we 
have no evidence that is of much value. The Gospel itself gives 
no sure clue. The peculiarities of its diction point to a centre 
in which Hellenistic influences prevailed ; and the way in which 
places in Palestine are mentioned have been thought to in* 
dicate^that the Gospel was written outside Palestine (L 26, 
ii. 4, iv. 31, viii. 26, xxiii. 51, xxiv. 13). The first of these 
considerations does not lead to anything very definite, and the 

1 Among them are Alfbrd, Ebrard, Farrar, Glotg, Godet, Gx*u, Gticrike, 
Halm, Hitzig, Hofmann, Hug, Keil, Lange, Lumby, Nosgea, Oottcntee, Retch, 
Riehm, Schaff, Schanr (67-70), Thiewch, Thotack, *nd Witteler. 

5.] OBJECT AND PLAN xxxiii 

second has little or no weight The fact that the Gospel was 
written for readers outside Palestine, who were not familiar with 
the country, accounts for all the topographical expressions. We 
do not know what evidence Jerome had for the statement which 
he makes in the preface to his commentary on S. Matthew : 
Tertlus Lucas medicus, natione Syrus Antiochensis (cujus laus in 
Evangelio)) qui et discipulus apostoli Pauli> in Achaise Bceotiseque 
partibus volumen condidit (2 Cor. viii.), qu&dam altius repetens, 
et ut ipse in pro&mio confitetur^ audita magis, quam visa descnbens 
(Migne, xxvi. 18), where some MSS. have Bithynias, for B&oti&. 
Some MSS. of the Peshitto give Alexandria as the place of com- 
position, which looks like confusion with Mark. Modern guesses 
vary much : Rome (Holtzmann, Hug, Keim, Lesebusch, Zeller), 
Csesarea (Michaelis, Schott, Thiersch, Tholuck), Asia Minor 
(Hilgenfeld, Oyerbeck), Ephesus (Kostlin), and Corinth (Godet), 
There is no evidence for or against any of them. 


(i.) The immediate Object is told us in the preface. It was 
written to give Theophilus increased confidence in the faith which 
he had adopted, by supplying him with further information 
respecting its historical basis. That Theophilus is a real person, 
and not a symbolical personage representing devout Christians in 
general, 1 is scarcely doubtful, although Bishop Lightfoot, with 
characteristic caution, has warned us not to be too confident of 
this, A real person is intrinsically more probable. The name 
was a very common one, fairly frequent among Jews, and very 
frequent among Gentiles. It is thus quite unlike such obviously 
made up names as Sophron and Neologus in a modern book, 
or Philotheus, to whom Ken dedicates his Manual of Prayer for 
Winchester scholars. Moreover, the epithet Kparurre is far more 
likely to have been given to a real person than to a fictitious one. 
It aoes not however necessarily imply high rank or authority (Acts 
xxiii. 26, xxiv. 3, xxvi. 25), and we must be content to be in ignor- 
ance as to who Theophilus was and where he lived. But the tone 
of the Gospel leads us to regard him as a representative Gentile 
convert, who was anxious to know a good deal more than the few 
fundamental facts which were taught to catechumens. The topo- 
graphical statements mentioned above, and such remarks as "the 

1 The idea that Theophilus may symbolize the true disciple is as old as 
Origen {Horn. i. in Lu.) 9 and is adopted by Ambrose : serif turn est evangelinm 
ad Theofhilum^ hoc est ad turn yuem Deus diligti (Comm. in Luc, i. 3). 
Epiphamus regards the name's denoting rat foSfwros 6ed? d-yairwj' as a possible 
alternative (&*r. ii. i. 51, Migne, xlL 900). 


feast of unleavened bread which is called the passover" (xxii. i), 
would not have been required for a Jewish convert. 

But, although Theophilus was almost certainly an actual person 
well known to Luke, we need not suppose that the Evangelist had 
only this one reader in view when he wrote. It is evident that he 
writes for the instruction and encouragement of all Gentile con* 
verts, and possibly Greek-speaking converts in particular. Theo- 
philus is to be the patron of the book with a view to its 
introduction to a larger circle of readers. Perhaps Luke hoped 
that Theophilus would have it copied and disseminated, as he 
probably did. 

Among the many indications that the book is written by a 
Gentile for Gentiles are the substitution of Greek for Hebrew names, 

o ZyXurys for o e KavavaLOS (vi. 15; Acts i. 13), and Kpaviov for 

FoXyoOG. (xxiii. 33) ; his never using 'Pa/?/?ei as a form of address, 
but either StSduncoAe or en-io-Tara ; l his comparatively sparing use 
of apty (seven times as against thirty in Matthew), for which he 
sometimes substitutes aXyOfa (ix. 27, xii. 44, xxi. 3) or CTT' aXydefas 
(iv. 25, xxiL 59); his use of vo/u/cos for ypa/tywxreus (vii. 30, x. 25, 
xi. 45, 46, 52, xiv. 3) ; his adding axdOapTov as an epithet to 
Scu/xdViov (iv. 33), for Gentiles believed in good Sat/tono, whereas 
to a Jew all &u/*oVia were evil ; his avoiding /j,Tpop<t>vQi] (Mk. 
ix. 2 ; Mt xvii. 2) in his account of the Transfiguration (ix. 29), a 
word which might have suggested the metamorphoses of heathen 
deities ; his notice of the Roman Emperor (ri. i), and using his 
reign as a date (iii. i) ; his tracing the Saviour's descent to Adam, 
the parent of Gentile as well as Jew (iii. 38). Although full 
honour is shown to the Mosaic Law as binding on Jews (ii. 21, 

27, 39, v. 14, x. 26, xvi. 17, 29-31, xvii. 14, xviii. 20), yet there it 
not much appeal to it as of interest to his readers. Luke has no 
parallels to Mt. v. 17, 19, 20, 21, 27, 31, 33, xii. 5-7, 17-^0, 
xv. i-2o. The quotations from the Old Testament are few as 
compared with Matthew, and they are found mostly in the sayings 
of Christ (iv. 4, 8, 12, 18, 19, 26, vi. 4, vii 27, viiL 10, xiii. 19, 

28, 29 3S> x' 20, xix. 46, xx. 17, 37, 42, 43, xxi 10, 24, 26, 27, 

35> xxii- 37* 69, xxiii. 30, 46) or of others (i 15, 17, 37, 4&~SS> 
68-79, & 3> 3 X > 3 2 > fo 10, "> x. 27, xx. 28). Very little is said 
about the ftilfilment of prophecy, which would not greatly interest 
Gentile readers (iii 4, iv. 21, xxi. 22, xxii, 37, xxiy. 44); and of 
these five instances, all but the first occur in sayings of Christ 
addressed to Jews. Many of the quotations noted above are mere 

1 The following Hebrew or Aramaic words, which oxxur in the other Gospels, 
are not found in Luke : 'Aa (Mk.), Boove/yyfc (Mk.), TaBpadci yn.), 
'Eftoafcrf (Jn.), 'E/VKwovtfX (Mt.), *<M>a6d (Mk*), K<^ (Mk.), Ko/>jWt 
(Mt.), Mc<r<r/af (Jn.), &raiwi (Mt. Mk, Jn.), together with the laying*, ruXfttt 
irofri (Mk.) and Aut Aorf, *.r.X. (Mt Mk.). 


reproductions, more or less conscious, of the words of Scripture ; 
but the following are definitely given as citations : iL 23, 24, hi. 4, 
iv. 4, 8, 10, n, 12, 18, 19, vii. 27, x. 27, xviii. 20, xix. 46, xx. 17, 
28, 37, 42, 43, xxii. 37. Excepting vii. 27, they may all have come 
from LXX. 1 And vii. 27 does not agree with either the Hebrew 
or LXX of Mai. lii. i, and is no evidence that the Evangelist 
knew Hebrew. On the other hand it agrees verbatim with Mt. 
xi. 10, and we need not doubt that both Evangelists used the same 
source and copied it exactly. Add to these his command of the 
Greek language and his use of " Judsea" for the land of the Jews, 
i. A the whole of Palestine (i. 5, iv. 44?, viL 17, xxiii. 5 ; Acts ii. 9, 
x. 37, xi. i, 29). This combination of non-Jewish features would 
be extraordinary in a treatise written by a Jew or for Jews. It is 
thoroughly intelligible in one written by a Gentile for Gentiles. 

In his desire to give further instruction to Theophilus and 
many others like him, it is evident that Luke aims at fulness. He 
desires to make his Gospel as compute as possible. This is dearly 
indicated in the prologue. He has " traced up the course of all 
things accurately from the first" (awQw iracrw), in order that 
Theophilus may "know in full detail" (Ztnyv&s) the historic 
foundations of the faith. And it is equally clearly seen in the 
Gospel itself. Luke begins at the very beginning, far earlier than 
any other Evangelist \ not merely with the birth of the Christ, but 
with the promise of the birth of the Forerunner. And he goes on 
to the very end : not merely to the Resurrection but to the Ascen- 
sion. Moreover his Gospel contains an immense proportion of 
material which is peculiar to himself. According to one calcula- 
tion, if the contents of the Synoptic Gospels are divided into 172 
sections, of these 172 Luke has 127 (f), Matthew 114 (f), and 

Mark 84 ft) ; and of these 172 Luke has 48 which are peculiar to 
lf (f), 

himself (f), Matthew has 22 (|), and Mark has 5 ($V). According 
to another calculation, if the total be divided into 124 sections, of 
these Lk. has 93, Matthew 78, and Mark 67 ; and of these 124 
Luke has 38 peculiar to himself, Matthew 17, and Mark 2. 2 The 
portions of the Gospel narrative which Luke alone has preserved 
for us are among the most beautiful treasures which we possess, 
and we owe them in a great measure to his desire to make his 
collection as full as possible, 

1 Jerome (Comm. in Is. vL 9, Migne, rriv. 100) says, Evangelistam Lucam 
tradunt veUres Eccksito treutatores medictna artis fiusse setentt$simum> et 
wagis GTSBCOS litteras scisst quam Hebrews. Unde ct sermo ejus, tarn in Evan- 
gelo quam in Acttbus Apostolorum^ td tst in utroque. volumzn* t&mptior est, et 
stcularem rcdolettloquentiam, magisque ttstimoniis Grseds utiturquam ffebr&ts. 

1 Six miracles are peculiar to Luke, three to Matthew, and two to Mark. 
Eighteen parables are peculiar to Luke, ten to Matthew, and one to Mark. 
See p. xli. For other interesting statistics respecting the relations between the 
Synoptists see Westcott, Intr. U Gospels, pp. 194 ff. 


It is becoming more and more generally admitted that the old 
view of the purpose of Gospel and Acts is not far off the truth. It 
was Luke's intention to write history, and not polemical or apolo- 
getic treatises. It was his aim to show all Christians, and especi- 
ally Gentile Christians, on how firm a basis of fact their belief was 
founded. The Saviour had come, and He had come to save the 
whole human race. The work of the Christ and the work of His 
Apostles proved this conclusively. In the Gospel we see the 
Christ winning salvation for the whole world ; in the Acts we see 
His Apostles carrying the good tidings of this salvation to the 
whole world. Luke did not write to depreciate the Twelve in the 
interests of S. Paul ; nor to vindicate S. Paul against the attacks of 
Judaizmg opponents ; nor yet to reconcile the Judaizers with the 
disciples of S. Paul. A Gospel which omits the severe rebuke 
incurred by Peter (Mt. xvi. 23 ; Mk. viii. 33), the ambitious 
request of James and John (Mt. xx. 21 ; Mk. x. 37), the boastful 
declaration of loyalty made by all the Twelve (Mt xxvi. 35 ; Mk. 
xiv. 31), and the subsequent flight of all (ML xxvi. 56 ; Mk. 
xiv. 50) ; which promises to the Twelve their judgment-thrones 
(xxii. 30), and trusts them with the conversion of " all the nations " 
(xxiv. 47), cannot be regarded as hostile to the Twelve. And why 
address a vindication of Paul to a representative Gentile ? Lastly, 
how could Judaizers be conciliated by such stern judgments on 
Judaism as Luke has recorded ? See, for instance, the following 
passages, all of them from what is peculiar to Luke: iv. 28, 29, 
x. 10, n, 31, 32, xi. 39, 40, xii. 47, xiii. 1-5, 15, xvi. 15, xvii. 18, 
xviii. 10-14, xxiii. 28-31 ; Acts iL 23, v. 30, vii. 51-53, etc. It is 
well that these theories as to the purpose of the Evangelist have 
been propounded : the examination of them is most instructive* 
But they do not stand the test of careful investigation. S. Luke 
remains unconvicted of the charge of writing party pamphlets 
under the cover of fictitious history. 

(ii.) The Plan of the Gospel is probably not elaborated. In 
the preface Luke says that he means to write "in ordrr" (Wf>/v) 
and this most naturally means in chronological order. Omitting 
the first two chapters and the last chapter in each case, the 
main features of the First and Third Gospels agree ; and in outline 
their structure agrees to a large extent with that of the Second. 1 
Luke perhaps took the tradition which underlies all three Gospels 
as his chief guide, and inserted into it what he had gathered from 
other sources. In ananging the additional material he followed 
chronology, where fee had any chronological clue ; and where he 

J regards order, to the first half the Second and Third Gospels commonly 
while 4ve First varies. In the second half the First and Second com* 
, while the Third varies. Matthew's additions to the common 
mostly in the first half; Lulce's are mostly la the secood. 


had none (which perhaps was often the case), he placed similar 
incidents or sayings in juxtaposition. 

But a satisfactory solution of the perplexing phenomena has not yet been 
found : for what explains one portion of them with enticing clearness cannot be 
made to harmonize with another portion. We may assert with some confidence 
that Luke generally aims at chronological order, and that on the whole he 
attains it ; but that he sometimes prefers a different order, and that he often, 
being ignorant himself, leaves us also in ignorance as to chronology. Perhaps 
also some of his chronological arrangements are not correct. 

The chronological sequence of the Acts cannot be doubted ; and this is 
strong confirmation of the view that the Gospel is meant to be chronological in 
arrangement Comp. the use of KaBe&js viii. I ; Acts iii. 24, xi. 4, rviii. 23. 

That the whole Gospel is elaborately arranged to illustrate die development 
and connexion of certain theological ideas does not harmonize with the im- 
pression which it everywhere gives of transparent simplicity. That there was 
connexion and development in the life and work of Christ need not be doubted ; 
and the narrative which reports that life and work in its true order will illustrate 
the connexion and development. But that is a very different thing from the 
supposition that Luke first formed a scheme, and then arranged his materials to 
illustrate it So far as there is " organic structure and dogmatic connexion " in 
the Third Gospel, it is due to the materials rather than to the Evangelist 
Attempts to trace this supposed dogmatic connexion are instructive in two 
ways. They suggest a certain number of connexions, which (whether intended 
or not) are illuminative* They also show, by their extraordinary divergences, 
how far we are from anything conclusive in this direction. The student who 
compares the schemes worked out by Ebrard (Gosp. Hist, I, i. I, 20, 21), 
McClellan (N.T. pp. 427 ff.), Oosterzee (langfs Comm. Int 4), and West- 
cott (Int. to Gospels, ch. vii. note G) will gather various suggestive ideas, but 
will also doubt whether anything like any one of them was in the mind of the 

The analysis which follows is obtained by separating the 
different sections and grouping them under different heads. There 
is seldom any doubt as to where one section ends and another 
begins; and the grouping of the sections is avowedly tentative. 
But most analyses recognize a break between chapters iL and iii, 
at or about ix. 51 and xix. 28, and between chapters xxi. and xxiL 
If we add the preface, we have six divisions to which the numer- 
ous sections may be assigned In the two main central divisions, 
which together occupy nearly seventeen chapters, some subsidiary 
grouping has been attempted, but without confidence in its cor- 
rectness. It may, however, be conducive to clearness, even if 
nothing of the kind is intended by S. Luke. 1 The mark indicates 
that this portion is found in Luke alone ; * that it is common to 
Luke and Mark ; t that it is common to Luke and Matthew ; * that 
it is common to all three. 

1 The divisions and subdivisions of the Gospel In the text of WH. are most 
Instructive. Note whether paragraphs and sentences have spaces between them 
or not, and whether sentences begin with a capital letter or not The analysis 
of the Gospel by Stnday in Book by Book, pp. 402-404 (Isbbter, 1893)1 ^iu be 
found very helpruL 


There is a presumption that what is peculiar to Luke comes from some 
source that was not used by Mark or Matthew ; and this presumption is in som 
cases a strong one ; tf.^v the Examination of Christ before Herod, or the Walk 
to Emmaus ; but all that we know is that Luke has preserved something which 
they have not. Again there is a presumption that what is given by Luke and 
Matthew, but omitted by Mark, comes from some source not employed by the 
latter ; and this presumption is somewhat stronger when what is given by them, 
but omitted by him, is not narrative but discourse ; eg. the Parable of the 
Lost Sheep. Yet the book of *' Oracles," known to Matthew and Luke, but 
not known to Mark, is nothing more than a convenient hypothesis for which & 
good deal may be said. And it would be rash to affirm that the few (p. xxiv) 
sections which are found in Mark and Luke, but not in Matthew, such as the 
Widow's Mite, come from some source unknown to Matthew. The frequency 
of the uiark gives some idea of what we should have lost had S. Luke not 
been moved to write. And it must be remembered that hi the sections which 
are -common to him and either or both of the others he often gives touches of 
his own which are of the greatest value. Attention is frequently called to these 
in the notes- They should be contrasted with the additions made to the 
Canonical Gospels in the apocryphal gospels. 



1. The Annunciation of the Birth of the Forerunner (5-25)* 

2. The Annunciation of the Birth of the Saviour (26-38). 
j. The Visit of the Mother of the Saviour to the Mother of 

the Forerunner (39-56). 

4. The Birth of the Forerunner (57-80). 

5. The Birth of the Saviour (ii. 1-20). 

6. The Circumcision and Presentation of the Saviour 


7. The Boyhood of the Saviour (41-52). 


L The External Preparation for the Ministry ; The Preach- 
ing of the Baptist (iiL 1-22). 
i. The Date (i, 2). 
t. *The New Prophet, his Preaching, Prophecy, and 

Death (3-20). 
j. * He baptizes the Christ (21, 22). 

The Genealogy of the Christ (23-38), 
1L The Internal Preparation for the Ministry ; * Th* Tempta- 
tion (iv. 1-13). 
iiL The Ministry in Galilee (iv, 14-1x1 50). 

i. Visit to Nazareth; *At Capernaum an unclean Demon 

cast out (iv. 14-44). 

t. *The Miraculous Draught and the Call of Simon; 
*Two Healings which provoke Controversy; *Tha 
Call of Levi; *Two Sabbath Incident* which 
provoke Controversy (v. i-vi )* 

(5.] OBJECT AND PLAN rod* 

*The Nomination of the Twelve; fThe Sermon "on 
the Level Place"; tThe Centurion's Servant; 
The Widow's Son at Nain; tThe Message from 
the Baptist; The Anointing by the Sinner; The 
Ministering Women ; *The Parable of the Sower; 
* The Relations of Jesus ; * The Stilling of the Tem- 
pest ; * The Gerasene Demoniac ; *The Woman with 
the Issue and the Daughter of Jairus (vi. i2~viiL 56). 

4. *Tha Mission of the Twelve; *The Feeding of the 
Five Thousand ; * Peter's Confession and the First 
Prediction of the Passion; *The Transfiguration; 
*The Demoniac Boy; *The Second Prediction of 
the Passion; *Who is the greatest? 'Not against 
us is for us (ix. 1-50). 


i, The departure from Galilee and First Period of the 
Journey (ix. SI-XUL 35). 

i* The Samaritan Village; t Three Aspirants to Dis- 
cipleship; The Seventy: The Lawyer's Questions 
and the Good Samaritan; Mary and Martha 
(ix. si-x. 42). 

*. Prayer; * Casting out Demons by Beelzebub ; True 
Blessedness; * The Demand for a Sign: Denuncia- 
tion of Pharisaism ; t Exhortation to Sincerity ; 
The Avaricious Brother; The Rich Fool; God's 
Providential Care ; The Signs of the Times (XL i- 
xiL 59). 

3. Three Exhortations to Repentance; The Woman 
with a Spirit of Infirmity; *The Mustard Seed; 
tThe Leaven; The Number of the Saved; The 
Message to Andpas and fthe Lament over Jeru- 
salem (xui 1*35). 
iL The Second Period of the Journey (xiv. i-xviL 10). 

i. The Dropsical Man; Guests and Hosts; The 
Great Supper; The Conditions of Disciple&hip } 
tThe Lost Sheep; The Lost Coin; The Lost 
Son (xiv. i-xv. 32). 

t. The Unrighteous Steward; t Short Sayings; The 
Rich Man and Lazarus ; Four Sayings on * Offences, 
Forgiveness, t Faith, Works (xvi i-xvii. 10), 
tC. The Third Period of the Journey (rsil n-xix. 28), 

i. The Ten Lepers; *The coming of the Kingdom; 
The Unrighteous Judge; The Pharisee and the 
Publican (xvii. n-xviiL 14). 


2. * Little Children; *The Rich Young Ruler; *The 
Third Prediction of the Passion; *The Blind Man 
at Jericho; Zacchseus; The Pounds (xviii. 15- 
xix. 28). 

V. xix. 29-xxi. 38. LAST DAYS OF PUBLIC TEACHING: 

I. * The Triumphal Procession and Predictive Lament- 
atiqn; *The Cleansing of the Temple (xix. 29-48). 

t . The Day of Questions. * Christ's Authority and John's 
Baptism; *The Wicked Husbandmen; * Tribute; 
* The Woman with Seven Husbands ; * David's Son 
and Lord; *The Scribes; 'The Widow's Mite; 
* Apocalyptic Discourse (xx. i-xxi. 38). 


L The Passion (xxii. i-xxiii. 56). 

1. *The Treachery of Judas (xxii. r-6). 

2. *The Paschal Supper and Institution of the Eucharist; 

*The Strife about Priority; The New Conditions 
(xxii. 7-38). 

3. *The Agony; *The Arrest,; * Peter's Denials; The 

Ecclesiastical Trial; *The Civil Trial; Jesus 
sent to Herod; * Sentence; * Simon of Cyrene; 
The Daughters of Jerusalem , * The Crucifixion ; 
The Two Robbers; *The Death {xxii. 39- 
xxiii. 49). 

4. * The Burial (xxiii. 50-56), 

li. The Resurrection and the Ascension (xxfo) t 
i. *The Women at the Tomb (i-u). 
a. [Peter at the Tomb (12}.] 

3. The Walk to Emmaus (13-32), 

4. The Appearance to the Eleven (33-43)1 

5. Christ's Farewell Instructions (44-49). 

6. The Departure (50-53)* 

Note that each of the three divisions of the Ministry begins 
with scenes which are typical of Christ's rejection by His people: 
the Ministry in Galilee with the attempt on His life at Nazareth 
(iv. 28-30); the Ministry outside Galilee with the refusal of 
Samaritans to entertain Him (ix. 51-56); and that in Jerusalem 
with the Lament over the city (xix 41-44). In the first and last 
case the tragic rejection is heightened by being preceded by a 
momentary welcome. 

It will be rueful to collect for separate conddentkn tfa Mirmcka nd tb 
Fumbles which are i 


* Unclean Demon cast out 

* Peter's Wife's Mother healed. 
Miraculous Draught of Fish. 

* Leper cleansed* 

* Palsyed healed* 

* Withered Hand restored* 

t Centurion's Servant healed. 
Widow's Son raised. 

* Tempest stilled. 

* Gerasene Demoniac. 

* Woman with the Issue* 

* Tairus' Daughter raised* 

* Five Thousand fed. 

* Demoniac Boy. 

f Dumb Demon cast out* 
Spirit of Infirmity. 
Dropsical Man. 

fTen Lepers cleansed* 
Blind Man at Jericho* 
| Malchus' ear. 


I Two Debtors* 

1 Sower. 

Good Samaritan* 

Friend at midnight 

Rich Fool. 

Watchful Servant*. 

i Barren Fig-tree. 
Mustard Seed. 
f Leaven, 
f Chief Seats. 

Great Supper. 

Rash Builder, 

Rash King, 
t Lost Sheep. 
5 Lost Coin. 
| Lost Son. 

I Unrighteous Steward* 
| Dives and Lazarus. 
Unprofitable Servants* 
I Unrighteous Judge. 
Pharisee and Publican* 

Wicked Husbandmen. 

Thus, out of twenty miracles recorded by Luke, six are peculiar to him ; 
while, out of twenty-three parables, all but five are peculiar to him. And he 
omits only eleven, ten peculiar to Matthew, and one peculiar to Mark (iv. 26-29). 
Whence did Luke obtain the eighteen parables which he alone records? And 
whence did Matthew obtain the ten parables which he alone records ? If the 
" Oracles " contained them all, why does each Evangelist omit so many ? If 
S. Luke knew our Matthew, why does he omit all these ten, especially the 
Two Sons (Mt. xri. 28-32), which points to the obedience of the Gentiles (see 
p. xxiv). In illustration of the met that the material common to all three 
Gospels consists mainly of narratives rather than discourses, it should be noticed 
that most of the twenty miracles in Luke are in the other two also, whereas 
only three of the twenty-three parables in Luke are also in Matthew and Mark. 
It is specially worthy of note that the eleven miracles recorded by all three 
occur in the same order in each of the Gospels ; and the same is true of the 
three parables which are common to all three. Moreover, if we add to these the 
three miraculous occurrences which attest the Divinity of Christ, these also are 
in the same order in each. The Descent of the Spirit with the Voice from 
Heaven at the Baptism precedes all. The Transfiguration is placed between 
the feeding of the 5000 and the healing of the demoniac boy. The Resurrection 
closes alL Evidently the order had already been fixed in the material which all 
three Evangelists employ. 


(i.) It has already been pointed out (p. xxxv) that Luke aims at 
falness and completeness, (a) Comprehensiveness is a charac- 
teristic of his Gospel. His Gospel is the nearest approach to a 
biography; and his object seems to have been to give his readers 


as full a picture as he could of the life of Jesus Christ, in all the 
portions of it infancy, boyhood, manhood respecting which he 
had information. 

But there is a comprehensiveness of a more important kind 
which is equally characteristic of him : and for the sake of a 
different epithet we may say that the Gospel of S. Luke is in a 
special sense the universal Gospel All four Evangelists tell us 
that the good tidings are sent to "all the nations " (Mt. xxviii. 19 ; 
ML xiii. 10 ; Lk. xxiv. 47) independently of birth (Jn. i. 12, 13). 
But no one teaches this so fully and persistently as S. Luke. He 
gives us, not so much the Messiah of the O.T., as the Saviour of 
all mankind and the Satisfier of all human needs. Again and 
again he shows us that forgiveness and salvation are offered to all, 
and offered freely, independently of privileges of birth or legal 
observances. Righteousness of heart is the passport to the King- 
dom of God, and this is open to everyone; to the Samaritan 
(ix. 51*56, x. 30-37, xvii. 11-19) and the Gentile (ii. 32, ill 6, 38, 
iv. 25-27, vil 9, x. i, xiii. 29, xxi. 24, xxiv. 47) as well as to the 
Jew (i. 33, 54, 68-79, ii. 10); to publicans, sinners, and outcasts 
(iii. 12, 13, v. 27-32, vii. 37-50, xv. i, 2, 11-32, xviii. 9-14, xix. 
2-10, xxiil 43) as well as to the respectable (vii. 36, xi. 37, xiv. i) ; 
to the poor (L 53, ii. 7, 8, 24, iv. 18, yi. 20, 21, vii 22, xiv. 13, 21, 
xvi. 20, 23) as well as to the rich (xix. 2, xxiii. 50). And hence 
Dante calls S. Luke "the writer of the story of the gentleness of 
Christ," scriba mansuctudinis Christi (De MonarMd, L 16 [18], 
ed. Witte, 1874, p. 33; Church, p. 210). It cannot be mere 
accident that the parables of the Good Samaritan, the Prodigal 
Son, the Great Supper, the Pharisee and the Publican, the rebukes 
to intolerance, and the incidents of the sinner in the house of 
Simon, arid of the penitent robber are peculiar to this Gospel Nor 
yet that it omits Mt vii. 6, x. 5, 6, xx. 16, xxiL 14, which might be 
regarded as hostile to the Gentiles. S. Luke at the opening of the 
ministry shows this universal character of it by continuing the 
great prophecy from Is. xL 3 ff. (which all four Evangelists quote) 
till he reaches the words "All flesh shall see the salvation of God " 
(iii. 6). ^ And at the close of it he alone records the gracious 
declaration that " the Son of Man is come to seek and to save that 
which was lost" (xix. 10; interpolated Mt xviii iij). 1 

It is a detail, but an important one, in the universality of the 
Third Gospel, that it is in an especial sense the Gospel for women. 
Jew and Gentile alike looked down on women. 2 But all through 
this Gospel they are allowed a prominent place, and many typei 

1 Comp. also the dose of the Acts, esp> xxviii. 28 j and the **t (Lk. 
xvL 16), which is not in Mt (xL M). 

1 In the Jewish liturgy the men thank God that they bar* not been mh 


of womanhood are placed before us : Elizabeth, the Virgin Mary, 
the prophetess Anna, the widow at Nain, the nameless sinner in 
the house of Simon, Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Susanna, the woman 
with the issue, Martha and Mary, the widow with the two mites, 
the "daughters of Jerusalem," and the women at the tomb. A 
Gospel with this marked antipathy to exdusiveness and intolerance 
appropriately carries the pedigree of the Saviour past David and 
Abraham to the parent of the whole human race (iii. 38). It is 
possible that Luke simply copied the genealogy as he found it, or 
that his extending it to Adam is part of his love of completeness ; 
but the thought of the father of all mankind is likely to have been 
present also. 

It is this all-embracing love and forgiveness, as proclaimed in 
the Third Gospel, which is meant, or ought to be meant, when it 
is spoken of as the " Gospel ofS. Paul." The tone of the Gospel 
is Pauline. It exhibits the liberal and spiritual nature of Chris- 
tianity. It advocates faith and repentance apart from the works 
of the Law, and tells abundantly of God's grace and mercy and the 
work of the Holy Spirit. In the Pauline Epistles these topics and 
expressions are constant 

The word ir/<rrf, which occurs eight times in Mt, five In Mk., and not 
at all in Jn., is found eleven times in Lk. and sixteen in the Acts : /terd?ota, 
twice in Mt, once in Mk., not in Jn., occurs five times in Lk. and six in Acts : 
X</u *, thrice in Jn., not Mt. or Mk,, is frequent both in Lk. and Acts : Xeos, 
thrice in Mt, not in Mk. or Jn., occurs six tunes in Lk. but not in Acts : d^eo-tt 
d/ia/>rla>p, once in Mt, twice in Mk., not in Jru, is found thrice in Lk. and 
five times in Acts ; and the expression " Holy Spirit, 91 which is found five times 
in Mt, four in Mk., four in Jn., occurs twelve times in Lk. and forty-one in 
Acts. See on L 15. 

It is characteristic that rfoa fitffQ&w fgcre (Mt v. 46) becomes oJa d/u? 
%dpit t<mv (Lk. vi 32) ; and fo&rffe fyteis rlXeiot, &f 6 rarJjp itf&v 6 ovpdvios 
r Aei6* <mv (Mt v. 48) becomes ybe<r$e oijcrlp/iorcf, xa0<bf A rar^p fywD* 
tlKrlppvr iariv (Lk. vi. 36). Note also the incidents recorded iv. 25-27 and 
x. 1-16, and the office of the Holy Spirit as indicated L 15, 35, 41, 67, ii 25, 
26, 37, iv. i, x, 31, xL 13, all of which are peculiar to Lk. 

But it is misleading in this respect to compare the Second 
Gospel with the Third. From very early times the one has been 
called the Petrine Gospel, and the other the Pauline. S. Mark is 
said to give us the teaching of S. Peter, S. Luke the teaching of 
S. Paul The statements are true, but in very different senses. 
Mark derived his materials from Peter. Luke exhibits the spirit 
of Paul : and no doubt to a large extent he derived this spirit from 
the Apostle. But he got his material from eye-witnesses. Mark 
was the interpreter of Peter, as Irenseus (iii. 1. i, 10. 6) and Tertullian 
(Adv Marcton. iv. 5) aptly called him : he made known to others 
what Peter had said. Paul was the illuminator of Luke (Tert. iv. 2 ) : 
he enlightened him as to the essential character of the Gospel. 



Luke, as his "fellow-worker," would teach what the Apostle taught, 
and would learn to give prominence to those elements in the 
Gospel narrative of which he made most frequent use. Then at 
last " Luke, the companion of Paul, recorded in a book the Gospel 
preached by him" (Iren. iii. i. i). 

Julicher sums up the case justly when he says that Luke has adopted from 
Paul no more than the whole Catholic Church has adopted, viz. the universality of 
salvation and the boundlessness of Divine grace : and it is precisely in these two 
points that Paul has been a clear-sighted and logical interpreter of Jesus Christ 
\Einl 27, p. 204). See also Knowling, Th* Witness of the EpistUs, p. 328, 
and the authorities there quoted. 

Holtzmann, followed^by Davidson (Introd. to JV.T. ii. p. 17) and Schaflf 
(Apostolic Christianity^ ii. p. 667), gives various instances of parallelism be- 
tween the Third Gospel and the Pauline Epistles. Resch (Ausscreanonische 
ParalUltexte^ p. 121, Leipzig, 1893), while ignoring some of Holtzmann's ex- 
amples, adds others ; but some of his are not very convincing, or depend upon 
doubtful readings. The following are worth considering : 

iv. 32. to gowrlg, fr o \6yot adrofc 

VI. 36. &Mri)piFfl&90lKTipfJl<itvtffTtv. 

> 39 M Wiwui ru<f>\bt 

HvQpurbt ttfu fab 
viii. 12. TUTTffaayrtt ffuQQffir. 

viii. 13. perk %a/)af ^orrat r. 

I Cor. ii. 4. 6 \6yos pan 

2 Cor. i. 3. 4 Tarty) rwv o/jcrcp^wr. 
Rom. ii. 19. 

vi. 48, 
vii. 8. 

1 Cor. lii. 10. 0cfi\toy 
Rom. xiu. I. Ifoua-lcu? 

1 Cor. i. 21. ffd 
Rom. i. 1 6. tfr 

Tturrl r. 


x. 7. 4u>f 7^p o ipydnjt rov fUff$oQ 
x. 8. Iffdlcrt rd TapaTiBtptra. jJ/u>. 

I Tim. v. 18. tof 

I Cor. x. 27. Tar T^ 

x. 16. 5 d^ercoy v/tas i/J& ddere?' a 
i ^ dfferuv d0er rov droffretXew^rd 

x. 2O, 

& rots ofywou. 
xi. 7. 

xi. 29. 

xi. 41. jca2 /9oi> rdrra 


xii. 35. &rrv<raj' 


xii. 42. TS 4/>a 

. <rijfjuTov 

I Thes. iv. 8. 6 d0err oi/x 
ror d^erct dXXd riv 9e6v. 

Phil. iv. 3. r ri Mtutr* t* Blff\<* 

y(Ps. > lrrr.28). 
Gal. vi. 17* x6xovf 
1 Cor. i. 22. 

Tit i 15. Tdira ifa^a/)d row 


Eph. vi. 14. 

xiii. 27. dir&JTTTre dr* 
pydrat d5iray (Ps. vi. 8). 
x:vm. I. 5< 

. xi. 5). 

1 Cor. iv. 2. ^rmrcu fr 
Atots ?va mortis rts e^pr^J. 

2 Tim. ii. 19. dirotrrTTT 

iros 6 ovofjuifbjy rd 5vo/i A. 
Col. 1, 3 ^dxrore irpoat i^^rvot. 
2 Thes. i. 1 1. 7rp<xrtx<;/A0a rdrror*, 


Kid ph frKa/cetp. Gal. vL 9. . 

xx. 1 6. vb yfroiro. Rom. ix. 14, xi II; Gal. iii 21. 

xx. 22, 25. #|e<mi> jf/juit Kafcra/x Rom. xui 7. farddwe vaffir rdf 

06/jo^ Soui/ai ^ otf ; d-65ore r& Kafcra- tfeiMs, T$ rbv tfpov r&v $6pov. 
pos Kal<rapt. 

xx. 35. olterorafiwtewesToBafwj'oi 2 Thes. I 5. eh rb 

xx. 38. *r<pTt Tdp adry f&nr. Rom. vi II. 

Gal. ii. 19. tea 

xxi 23. fora ybp . . . (5/>y^ ry I Thes. LU 1 6. 
Xay rotJry. ij ^p^ e/y r^Xoj. 

xxi. 24. dxpi o5 TXijpw5cD<rtjr jcatpol Rom. xi. 25. 

xsL 34. fit wore papyBwtvalicapdlai l Thes. v. 3-5. rre atyvlfaot 
& Kpea-dXy xal {^9-$ . . . Kal ^r/orartu ti\e&pot . . . yue;y ^ 
' ^xaj ?>5tps a <<cn ^<rr^ ^v <ncdret tpa a ^t 

XXL 36. fcypvuvetr* te fr rarrt K<up$ Egh. vi i& 

fjxvoi* K<up(f . . . KO! 

xxii. 53. ^ ^ouo-a rov <nc6rovt. CoL L 13. ^/c r^y tfoveUu roD a'lc^rovt* 

It is not creditable to modern scholarship that the foolish opinion, quoted 
by Eusebius with a <f>ourl 84 (ff. E. ui. 4, 8) and by Jerome with quidam- JKJ- 
puantur (JDe mr. ittus. \oi.), that wherever S. Paul speaks of "my Gospel" 
(Rom. ii 1 6, xvi. 25 ; 2 Tim. IL 8) he means the Gospel of S. Luke, still 
finds advocates. And the supposition that the Third Gospel is actually quoted 
I Tim. v. 18 is incredible. The words \yi ^ 7pa^ refer to the first sentence 
only, which comes from Deut. xxv. 4. "What follows, " the labourer is worthy 
of his hire," is a popular saying, adopted first by Chnst (Lk. x. 7 ; Mt r. 10) 
and then by S. PauL Had S. Paul quoted the saying as an utterance of Christ, 
he would not have said Xyet -f) ypa<ptf. He would have used some such expres- 
sion as fJLvijiJiove&eiv r&v \6yu>v rov Kvplov 'lycrov Sri atirbs \4yei (Acts xx. 35), or 
vo/xryyAXet d /o/ptos (I Cor. vii IO, 12), or /Aepvytdvoi rwr X6ywy roi; Kvplov 
'Iijtrovy oQs AdXi}0-eF (Clem. Rom. Cor. xui I ; comp. xlvi 7), or simply eZarcr 
6 jctfpiot (Polyc* vii 2). Comp. I Thes. iv. 15 ; I Cor. ix. 14, xi 23, 

(S) More than any of the other Evangelists S. Luke brings 
before his readers the subject of Prayer ; and that in two ways, 
(i) by the example of Christ, and (2) by direct instruction. All 
three Synoptists record that Christ prayed in Gethsemane (Mt 
xxvL 39 ; ML xiv. 35 ; Lk. xxii. 41) ; Mark (i. 35) mentions His 
retirement for prayer after healing multitudes at Capernaum, where 
Luke (iv. 42) merely mentions the retirement: and Matthew 
(xiv. 23) and Mark (vi. 46) relate His retirement for prayer after 
the feeding of the 5000, where Luke (ix. 17) relates neither. But 
on seven occasions Luke is alone in recording that Jesus prayed : 
at His Baptism (iii. 21) ; before His first collision with the hierarchy 
(v. 1 6); before choosing the Twelve (vi. 12); before the first 
prediction of the Passion (ix. 18) ; at the Transfiguration (ix. 29); 
before teaching the Lord's Prayer (xL i); and on the Cross (xxiiL 
[34], 46). Moreover, Luke alone relates the declaration of Jesus 
that He had made supplication for Peter, and His charge to the 
Twelve, "Pray that ye enter not into temptation w (xxii 32, 40). 


It was out of the fulness of His own experience that Jesus said, 
"Ask, and it shall be given you" (xi. 9). Again, Luke alone re- 
cords the parables which enjoin persistence in prayer, the Friend 
at Midnight (xi. 5-13) and the Unrighteous Judge (xviil 1-8); 
and to the charge to " watch " (Mt xxv. 13 ; ML xiii. 33) He adds 
"at eveiy season, making supplication, that ye may prevail," etc. 
(xxi. 36). In the parable of the Pharisee and the Publican the 
difference between real and unreal prayer is illustrated (xviiL 

(c) The Third Gospel is also remarkable for the prominence 
which it gives to Praise and Thanksgiving. It begins and ends 
with worship in the temple (i. 9, xxiv. 53). Luke alone has pre- 
served for us those hymns which centuries ago passed from his 
Gospel into the daily worship of the Church: the Gloria in 
Excels^ or Song of the Angels (ii. 14) ; the Magnificat^ or Song 
of the blessed Virgin Mary (i. 46-55) ; the Benedictus^ or Song of 
Zacharias (L 68-79) > *&& & Q Nunc Dimittis^ or Song of Symeon 
(ii. 29-32). Far more often than in any other Gospel are we told 
that those who received special benefits "glorified God" (Sootx 
TOV @>eov) for them (ii. 20, v. 25, 26, vii. 16, xiii. 13, xvii. 15, 
xviii- 43)- Comp. Mt ix. 8, xv. 31; Mk. ii, 12. The expression 
"praising God" (aivtiv rbv <5>eoV) is almost peculiar to Luke in 
N.T. (ii. 13, 20, xix. 37, xxiv. 53?; Acts ii. 47, iii. 8, 9). "Bless- 
ing God" (aJAoysiv TOT/ eoi>) is almost peculiar to Luke (i. 64, 
ii. 28, xxiv. 53 ?) : elsewhere only Jas. iii. 9. " Give praise (alvov 
StSorai) to God" occurs Luke xviii. 43 only. So also x a W ty * 
which occurs eight times in Matthew and Mark, occurs nineteen 
times in Luke and Acts ; x a P* seven times in Matthew and Mark, 
thirteen times in Luke and Acts. 

(et) The Gospel of S. Luke^is rightly styled "the most literary 
of the Gospels " (Renan, Les Evangiles^ ch. xiii.). " S. Luke has 
more literary ambition than his fellows " (Sanday, Book by Book^ 
p. 401). He possesses the art of composition. He knows not 
only how to tell a tale truthfully, but how to tell it with effect He 
can feel contrasts and harmonies, and reproduce them for his 
readers. The way in which he tells the stories of the widow's son 
at Nain, the sinner in Simon's house, Martha and Mary at 
Bethany, and the walk to Emmaus, is quite exquisite. And one 
might go on giving other illustrations of his power, until one had 
mentioned nearly the whole Gospel. The sixth century was not 
far from the truth when it called him a painter, and said that he 
had painted the portrait of the Virgin. There is no picture of her 
so complete as his. How lifelike are his sketches of Zacharias, 
Anna, Zacchseus, Herod Antipas ' And with how few touches Js 
tach done ! As a rule Luke puts in fewer descriptive details than 
Mark. In his description of the Baptist he omits the strange attire 


and food (Mk. i. 6 ; Mt iii, 4). In the healing of Simon's wife's 
mother he omits the taking of her hand (Mk. i. 31 ; Mt viii. 15)* 
In that of the palsied he omits the crowding at the door (Mk. ii. 2). 
And there are plenty of such cases. But at other times we have 
an illuminating addition which is all his own (iii. 15, 21, iv. 13, 15, 
40, 42, v. i, 12, 15, r 6, vi. 12, viii. 47, etc.). His contrasts are 
not confined to personal traits, such as the unbelieving priest and 
the believing maiden (i. 18, 38), the self-abasing woman and the 
self-satisfied Pharisee (vii. 37 ff.), the thankless Jews and the thank- 
ful Samaritan (xvii. 17), the practical Martha and the contemplative 
Mary (x. 38-42), the hostile hierarchy and the attentive people 
(xix. 47, 48), and the like; the fundamental antithesis between 
Christ's work and Satan's 1 (iv. 13, x. 17-20, xiii. 16, xxii. 3, 
3 r 53)> often exhibited in the opposition of the scribes and 
Pharisees to His work (XL 52, xiL i, xiii. 14, 31, xv. 2, xvi 14, 
xix- 39> 47> xx. 20), is brought out with special clearness. The 
development of the hostility of the Pharisees is one of the main 
threads in the narrative. It is this rare combination of descriptive 
power with simplicity and dignity, this insight into the lights and 
shadows of charactei and the conflict between spiritual forces, 
which makes this Gospel much more than a fulfilment of its 
original purpose (i. 4). There is no rhetoric, no polemics, no 
sectarian bitterness. It is by turns joyous and sad ; but even where 
it is most tragic it is almost always serene. 2 As the fine literary 
taste of Renan affirms, it is the most beautiful book in the world 

(e) S. Luke is the only Evangelist who writes history as distinct 
from memoirs. He aims at writing "in order," which probably 
means in chronological order (i. 5, 26, 36, 56, 59, ii. 42, iiL 23, 
ix. 28, 37, 51, xxii. i, 7), and he alone connects his narrative with 
the history of Syria and of the Roman Empire (ii i, iii. i^. The 
sixfold date (iii. i) is specially remarkable : and it is possible that 
both it and ii. i were inserted as finishing touches to the narra- 
tive. The words 2ro$ (ff ) and fwjv (V*) occur more often in his 
writings than in the rest of N.T. : and this fact points to a special 
fondness for exactitude as regards time. Where he gives no date, 
probably because he found none in his authorities, he fre- 
quently lets us know what incidents are connected together, 
although he does not know in what year or time of year to place 
the group (iv. i, 38, 40, vii. i, 18, 24, viii. i, x i, 21, XL 37, xii. i, 
xiii. i, 31, xix. ii, 28, 41, xxii. 66, xxiv. 13). He is very much 

1 Both in Mark (i. 21-28) and in Luke (iv. 31-37) the miracle of healing the 
demoniac in the synagogue at Capernaum is perhaps placed first as being 
typical of Christ's whole work. But there is no evidence of any special 
"demonology" in Luke. With the doubtful exception of the "spirit of 
infirmity'* (xiii. 10) there is no miracle of casting out demons which he alone 

* A marked guccptkro is the violent toeng so graphically dftcribod zL Cfl. C|i 


less definite than Josephus or Tacitus ; but that is only what we 
ought to expect He had not their opportunities of consulting 
public records, and he was much less interested in chronology than 
they were. Yet it has been noticed that the Agricola of Tacitus 
contains no chronology until the last chapter is reached. The 
value of Christ's words and works was quite independent of dates. 
Such remarks as he makes xvi. 14, xviii. i, 9, xix. n throw far 
more light upon what follows than an exact note of time would 
have done. Here and there he seems to be giving us his own 
estimate of the situation, as an historian or biographer might do 
(ii. 50, iiL 15, viii. 30, xx. 20, xxii. 3, xxiiL 12;: and the notes, 
whether they come from himself or his sources, are helpful. If 
chronology even in his Gospel is meagre, yet there is a continuity 
and development which may be taken as evidence of the true 
historic spirit 1 -He follows the Saviour through the stages, not 
only of His ministry, but of His physical and moral growth (ii. 40, 
42, 51, 52, iii. 23, iv. 13, xxii. 28, 53)- He traces the course of 
the ministry from Nazareth to Capernaum and other towns of 
Galilee, from Galilee to Samaria and Perasa, from Persea to Jeru- 
3alem, just as in the Acts he marks the progress of the Gospel, as 
represented successively by Stephen, Philip, Peter, and Paul, from 
Jerusalem to Antioch, from Antioch to Ephesus and Greece, and 
nnally to Rome. 

(f) But along with these literary and historical features it has a 
marked domestic tone. In this Gospel we see most about Christ in 
His social intercourse with men. The meal in the house of Simon, 
in that of Martha and Mary, in that of a Pharisee, when the 
Pharisees were denounced, in that of a leading Pharisee on a 
sabbath, when the dropsical man was healed, His sojourn with 
Zacchaeus, His walk to Emmaus and the supper there, are all 
peculiar to Luke's narrative, together with a number of parables, 
which have the same quiet and homely setting. The Good 
Samaritan in the inn, the Friend at Midnight, the Woman with the 
Leaven, the Master of the house rising and shutting the door, the 
Woman sweeping for the Lost Coin, the Father welcoming the Lost 
Son, all have this touch of familiar domesticity. And perhaps it 
is to this love of homely scenes that we may trace the fact that 
whereas Mk. (iv. 31) has the mustard-seed sown "on the earth," 
and Mt (xm. 31) makes a man sow it "in his field," Lk. (xiii. 19) 
tells us that a man sowed it " in his own garden" Birks, Ifttr* Rv* 
(ii.) When we consider the style and language of S. Luke, we 
are struck by two apparently opposite features, his great com- 

1 Ramsay regards Luke as a historical writer of the highest order, one who 
*' commands excellent means of knowledge . . . and brings to the treatment oif 
his subject genius, literary skill, and sympathetic historical inwght " (5. Paul 
the Traveller, pp, 2, 3, 20, 21, Hodder, 1895), 


mand of Greek and his very un-Greek use of Hebrew phrases and 
constructions. These two features produce a result which is so 
peculiar, that any one acquainted with them in detail would at 
once recognize as his any page torn out of either of his writings. 
This peculiarity impresses us less than that which distingu shes the 
writings of S. John, and which is felt even in a translation ; but it 
is much more easily analysed. It lies in the diction rather than in 
the manner, and its elements can readily be tabulated. But for this 
very reason a good deal of it is lost in translation, in which pecu- 
liarities of construction cannot always be reproduced. In any 
version the difference between S. Mark and S. John is felt by the 
ordinary reader. The most careful version would fail to show to 
an attentive student more than a good portion of the differences 
between S. Mark and S. Luke. 

The author of the Third Gospel and of the Acts is the most 
versatile of all the N.T. writers. He can be as Hebraistic as the 
LXX, and as free from Hebraisms as Plutarch. And, in the main, 
whether intentionally or not, he is Hebraistic in describing Hebrew 
society, and Greek in describing Greek society. It is impossible 
to determine how much of the Hebraistic style is due to the 
sources which he is employing, how much is voluntarily adopted 
by himself as suitable to the subject which he is treating. That 
Aramaic materials which he translated, or Greek materials which 
had come from an Aramaic source, influenced his language con- 
siderably, need not be doubted \ for it is where he had no such 
materials that his Greek shows least sign of such influences. In 
the second half of the Acts, where he writes of his own experiences, 
and is independent of information that has come from an Aramaic 
source, he writes in good late Greek. But then it is precisely here 
that he is describing scenes far away from Jerusalem in an Hellen- 
istic or Gentile atmosphere. So that it is quite possible that to 
some extent he is a free agent in this matter, and is not merely 
exhibiting the influence under which he is writing at the moment. 
No doubt it is true that, where he has used materials which directly 
or indirectly are Aramaic, there his style is Hebraistic ; but it may 
also be true that he has there allowed his style to be Hebraistic, 
because he felt that such a style was appropriate to the subject- 

He has enabled us to judge of the two styles by placing two 
highly characteristic specimens of each in immediate juxtaposition. 
In the Acts the change from the more Hebrew portion to the more 
Greek portion takes place gradually, just as in the narrative there 
is a change from a Hebrew period (i.-v.), through a transitional 
period (vi.-xii.), to a Gentile period (xiii.-xxviii.). 1 But in the 

1 Compare m this respect the letter of Lysias (xxiii. 26-30) and the speech 
of Tertullus (xxiv. 2-9) with the speeches of Peter (ii. 14-39, 



Gospel the remarkably elegant and idiomatic Greek of the Preface 
is suddenly changed to the intensely Hebraistic Greek of the open- 
ing narrative. It is like going from a chapter in Xenophon to a 
chapter in the LXX, 1 And he never returns to the style of the 
Preface. In the Gospel itself it is simply a question of more or 
less Hebrew elements. They are strongest in the first two chapters, 
but they never entirely cease ; and they are specially common at 
the beginning of narratives, eg. v. i, 12, 17, vi. i, 6, 12, viii. 22, 
ix. 1 8, 51, etc. It will generally be found that the parallel passages 
are, in the opening words, less Hebraistic than Luke. In construc- 
tion, even Matthew, a Jew writing for Jews, sometimes exhibits 
fewer Hebraisms than this versatile Gentile, who writes for Gentiles. 
Comp, Lk. ix. 28, 29, 33, 38, 39 with Mt. xvii. i, 2, 4, 15 ; Lk. 
xiii. 30 with Mt. xix. 30; Lk. xviii. 35 with Mt. xx. 29, Lk. xx. i 
with Mt. xxi. 23. 

From this strong Hebraistic tinge in his language some (Tiele, 
Hofmann, Hahn) have drawn the unnecessary and improbable 
conclusion that the Evangelist was a Jew; while others, from the 
fact that some of the Hebraisms and many other expressions 
which occur in the Third Gospel and the Acts are found also in 
the Pauline Epistles, have drawn the quite impossible conclusion 
that this hypothetical Jew was none other than S. Paul himself. 
To mention nothing else, the " we " sections in the Acts are fatal 
to the latter theory. In writing of himself and his companions, 
what could induce the Apostle to change backwards and forwards 
between "they" and "we"? As to the former theory, good 
reasons have been given above for attributing both books to a 
Gentile and to S. Luke, who (as S. Paul clearly implies in Col iv. 
11-14) was a Gentile. The Hebraistic colour in the Evangelist's 
language, and the elements common to his diction and that of the 
Pauline Epistles, can be easily explained, and more satisfactorily 
explained, without an hypothesis which imports more difficulties 
than it solves. The Hebraisms in Luke come partly from his 
sources, partly from his knowledge of the LXX, and partly from 
his intercourse with S. Paul, who often in his presence discussed 
the O.T. with Jews in language which must often have been 
charged with Hebraisms, The expressions which are common to 
the two Lucan documents and the Pauline Epistles are partly 
mere accidents of language, and partly the result of companion- 
ship between the two writers. Two such men could not have 
been together so often without influencing one another's language, 
S. Luke's command of Greek is abundantly shown both in the 
freedom of his constructions and also in the richness of his vocabulary. 

1 There are some who attribute the strongly Hebraistic tone of the first two 
chaptcis to a conscious and deliberate imitation of the LXX iftth&t than to th 
influence of Aramaic sources. 


(a) The freedom of his constructions is seen not infrequently 
even in his Hebraisms. Two instances will suffice, (i) His 
frequent use of eyo/cro is often purely Hebraistic (i. 8, 9), 
sometimes less so (vL i), sometimes hardly Hebraistic at all 
(Acts ix. 3, xxi. i). This will be found worked out in 
detail in a detached note at the end of ch, L (2) His 
frequent use of periphrastic tenses, ie. the substantive verb 
with a present or perfect participle instead of the simple 
tense, exhibits a similar variety. 

The use of fl* with pres. or perf. part as & periphrasis for lmper& or pluperf. 
indie, is of Aramaic origin in many cases and is frequent in the Gospels, most 
frequent in Luke ; but it is not always easy to say whether it is a Hebraism or 
a use that might very well stand in classical Greek. For fy with pres. part, see 
i. 10, 21, 22, ii. 33, 51, iv. 20, 31, 38, 44, v. 16, 17, 29, vi 12, viii 40, ix. 53, 
xi 14, xiii 10, n, xiv. i, xv. i, xix. 47, [rxi. 37], xxiii. 8, xxiv. 13, 32. Most 
of these are probably due to Hebrew or Aramaic influence ; but many would be 
admissible in classical Greek, and may be used to imply continuance of the 
action. In i. 21, 22, ii. 51, iv. 31, xv. l, xix. 47, *- 8, xxiv. 13, 32 the 
simple imperf. follows immediately in the next clause or sentence. That such 
cases as u. 33, iv. 20, ix. 53, xi. 14, xiii. 10, 1 1, xiv. i are Hebraistic need 
hardly be doubted. So also where fy with perf. part is used for the pluperf. 
(i. 7, ii. 26, iv. 16, 17, v. 17, ix. 32, 45, xviii. 34), L 7 and ix. 32 with most 
of the others are probably Hebraistic, but v. 17 almost certainly is not. 
Anyhow, Luke shows that he is able to give an Hellenic turn to his Hebraisms, 
so that they would less offend a Greek ear. Much the same might be said of 
his use of Kai to introduce the apodosis, which may be auite classical (ii. 21), 
but may also be Hebraistic, especially where ISot is added (vii. 12, xxiv. 4), or 
atrds (v. I, 17, vin. I, 22, ix. 51, etc.) : or of his frequent use of 6? ny with the 
infinitive (i. 8, 21, ii. 6, 43, v. I, etc.). 

Simcox, Lang, of N.T. pp. 131-134, has tabulated the use of periphrastic 
imperf. and pluperf. See also his remarks on Luke's Hebraisms, Writers of 
A". T. pp. 19-22. 

But Luke's freedom of construction is conspicuous In other respect*. Al- 
though he sometimes co-ordinates clauses, joining them, Hebrew fashion, with 
a simple ica( (i, 13, 14, 31-33, xvi. 19, etc.), yet he is able to vary his sentences 
with relatives, participles, dependent clauses, genitive absolutes, and the like, 
almost to any extent. We find this even in the most Hebraistic parts of the 
Gospel (i 20, 26, 27, ii 4, 21, 22, 26, 36, 37, 42, 43) ; but still more in other 
parts : see especially vii. 36-50. He is the only N.T. writer who uses the 
optative in indirect questions, both without fo (L 29, iii. 15, viii 9, xxii 3 ; Acts 
xvii n, xxi. 31, xxv. 20) and with it (vi. n, xv. 26 ; Acts v. 24, x. 17), some- 
times preceded by the article (i. 62, ix. 46). In xviii 36 the & is doubtful. 
The elegant and idiomatic attraction of the relative is very common in Luke 
(i 4, v. 9, ix. 36, xii. 46, xv. 16, xxiii 41 ; Acts i 22, ii 22, iii 21, 2$, etc.), 
especially after traf (ii. 20, iii. 19, ix. 43, xix. 37, xxiv. 25 ; Acts i I, x. 39, 
xiii 39, xxii. 10), whereas it occurs only twice in Matthew (xviii 19, xxiv. 50) 
and once in Mark (vii 13). His more frequent use of re is another instance of 
more idiomatic Greek (u. 16, xii 45, xv. 2, xxi ii (bis), xxii 66, xxiii. 12, 
xxiv. 20) : only once in Mark and four times in Matthew. Sometimes we find 
the harsh Greek of Matthew or Mark improved in the parallel passage in Luke : 
*.*. TWF 0eX6mi' <?r <rro\<us repraureu' ical cttnrcunrofo & rat's a-yopaif (Mk. xii 38) 
has an awkwardness which L 
(xx. 46). Or again, eZAX 


in more details than one in Luke : fav 5 efrrw/*ev 'E bvOpdiruv, 6 Xa&s Airas 
Ka.Ta\i9d<ret Jifias ireTreurfj.fros ydp ka-rw 'Itadvyv irpo^ryv etvai (xx. 6). Com- 
pare Kai irpwi %vwx<t Xto, which perhaps is a provincialism (Mk. i. 35), with 
yevontvys 5t i^pas (Lk. iv. 42). In the verses which follow, Luke's diction is 
smoother than Mark's. Compare also Lk. v. 29, 30 with Mk. 11. 15, 16 and 
Mt. ix. 10, II ; Lk. v. 36 with Mk. n 21 and Mt ix. 16; Lk, vi n with Mk. 
in 6 and Mt. xii. 14. The superior freedom and fulness of Luke's narrative of 
the message of the Baptist (vn. 18-21), as compared with that of Matthew 
(xi. 2, 3), is very marked. 

(ft) But Luke's command of Greek is seen also in the richness 
of his vocabulary. The number of words which occur in his two 
writings and nowhere else in N.T. is estimated at 750 or (includ- 
ing doubtful 1 cases) 851 ; of which 26 occur in quotations from 
LXX. In the Gospel the words peculiar to Luke are 312 ; of 
which 52 are doubtful, and n occur m quotations. Some of these 
are found nowhere else in Greek literature. He is very fond of 
compound verbs, especially with &< or em, or with two preposi- 
tions, as 7rarayetv, eTreto-cpxeer&u, di/Tt7ra/>epX ecr ^ at J crvyKaranBevaiy 
7rpoo-ava/?aiveiv. He may have coined some of them for himself. 
The following are among the most remarkable words and expres- 
sions which occur either m both his writings and nowhere else in 
N.T., or in his Gospel and nowhere else in N.T. No account is 
Vere taken of the large number, which are peculiar to the Acts. 

Those in thick type are found in LXX. Those with an 
asterisk are shown by Hobart to be frequent in medical writers. 
Many of these might be frequent m any writers. But the number 
of less common words, which are peculiar to Luke in N T., and 
are fairly common in medical writers, is remarkable ; and thobe of 
them which are not found in LXX are specially to be noted. 

Thirty times in G and A i-y^vcTo Se (not Jn. x, 22) . 

Nine times in G. and A. ^ju^pa ytveTu. 

Eight times in G. Iv ai-rg TJ) (ijfjifyq,, wpq,, olidg.). 

Seven times in G. and A. diroSe'x<r0cu, * trvvpdXXciv, tv rats ijfitpais rat/raw. 

Sue times in G. and A. KaOd-u, irovt]p6s as an epithet of we fywt : six in G. 

Five times in G. and A. ejffis, /ca^e^s /ca0' 6X^s ry$ t Trpoo^xere ^avro?s, <J 
ffTpanrjy6$ or ol <rrp. rov lepou, 6 tf\|u<rTOS or \J\|/to-TOS (of God) : five in G. 
dvaKpCveiv (m the legal sense), /cat euros, ical <3s 9 XCp-vq, tv jug. 

Pour times in G. and A. fcirrav, diairopew, liraCpciv rtjv ^cav 
Ka0i^vai, *6Svvaor0ai, * ojiuVtv, * orvv<xp7r<5,eiv, afrtov, Ivavrfov, 
/cp(rto-ros, * irapaXeXu/x^vos (in the medical sense of " palsied * ) : foui ui G. 
*KaTaKXviv, paXXdvriov, ^vi], &s fyyurev. 

Three times m G. and A. dvaturetv, dgiotJv c. tnf' , StcXe^tv ?a>s Suo-rA- 
vai, ^irt(3Lpd^Lv, * ^trix.cpi,v, <ru^irXi]pow, avr-g rfj wpa, air alwvos, 
-rfjs, rd S^crjAa, 8ovXij, tvavri, Icnr^pa, Odftpos, govXtj TOV eov, 
iroXtrys, T Tjjilpa r&v o-appdrov, * <rvv-y4via, rA ^nrdpxovra avr<, 
KvpCou: three m G. Ocpa-rrevciv dird 7 crKa-rrr^tv, o-Ktpr^v, /card r6 
crirevrds, rf yiiApq, roO cra^/Sdrou, ^ pig. rQv 

1 Owing to the various readings it may be doubted either (O \\hethcr the 
word is used by Luke, or (2) whether it is not used by some other writer. 


hi G. and A. dpafounrfpac, dvaica6leiv 9 *&vcunr<jv, ivo^aCvciv, 

* &veupt<ricciv, dvTetir^tv, diro-ypacf)^, * dironvdcro-civ, * Starr) petv, * faurxvpl* 
<r0a.L, * SioSeiJfitv, * IvcSaeveiv, &iri8civ, * ev-rrfvws, 17? <x/^7> ^XP* wwpoO, 

* KaraKXeietv, KaraKoXo-60iv, ArXdtrts, icXCvei -q T)jJ.^pa, * icXivCSiov, 6piv<fc, 

* irapapid^eo-dai, ircpiXafjiireiv, iropcvov els elp^vijv, * irpopaXXetv, irpoiroptiS- 
cr0ai, *'n-pocrSoKta, *irpov7rdpxi>v> crrpaTtd, crvveivai, TpaviiaT^civ, Tpax^s, 
Xp0(f>iX^TT]s : twice in G. Aypu, * dvdircipos, * &vri,iraplpxecr0ai, da^rpawreiv, 
arep, * avo"n]p<5s, Potivrf *-- - . . 

eiv, IxTcXeiv, iiraireiv, ' 
IQ irais, -irpdKTwp, ' 
X peiv. 

It is not worth while to make a complete list of the words (over aoo in 
number) which occur once in the Third Gospel and nowhere else in N.T. The 
following will give a good idea of their character ; 

s, avdSeifis, * todXitfiipa , 

V, * aTTOlcXcUlV, dlTOCTOfM- 

, ^ptf. 

aavruciv 9 

( ( "IW Va WMVW4 WbhVkr* IVIVK|*"* I ' v*** CIVXWWCkr* C/UtUI/>' illK/lX 

Xeuv, ^ 

i-TTicriTto-iJLiSs, * ^irwrx^eiv, *Iirixeiv, 'e^^opetp, * ^idav^v, 
yeXoj, * teardpcwns, * KaraSctv* AcaraXi^dfeiy, 
v, icXio-Ca, Kpevd\7j 9 Kpvrrfj, Xa/iTpOf, * Xijpos, 

, irpo<ravapaCvciv, 
* , * <raXo$, 

* <ruKOL|uvos, <rvKofJwp4a, cruvKaraTiO^vai, *<ruvKvpCa, * crwirCwTtiv, *crw 
rerpairX6of, * 

But the words which are peculiar to Luke in N.T. are by 
no means even the chief of the marks of his style. Still more 
striking are those expressions and constructions which he uses 
frequently, or more frequently than any other writer. Many of 
these occur more often hi S. Luke's writings than in all the rest 
of N.T. A collection of them is rendered much more useful by 
being to some extent classified ; and the following lists have been 
made with a view to illustrating the affinities between the diction 
of S. Luke and of S. Paul and that of the Epistle to the Hebrews 
both jointly with the Pauline Epistles and also by itself. In this 
survey the Pastoral Epistles have been kept distinct from the main 
groups of the Pauline Epistles, in order to show their harmony with 
the diction of the Apostle's beloved companion. Words peculiar to 
Luke and to the Pastoral Epistles are not improbably Pauline. 
Words which are found in other Pauline Epistles as well as 
in the Pastoral Epistles and in Luke's writings are still more 
safely regarded as Pauline 

Eight classes have been made; and in them the very great 
variety of the words included, many of them quite classical or of 




classical formation, illustrate the richness of S. Luke's vocabular} 
and his command of the Greek language, (i) Expressions peculiar 
to S. Luke and S. Paul in N.T. (2) Peculiar to S. Luke and 
S Paul and the Epistle to the Hebrews. (3) Peculiar to S. Luke 
and the Epistle to the Hebrews. (4) Not found in any other 
Gospel and more frequent in S. Luke than in the rest of N.T. 
(5) Found in one or more of the other Gospels, but more fre* 
quent in S. Luke than in the rest of N.T. (6) Due to Hebrew 
influence. (7) Miscellaneous expressions and constructions which 
are specially frequent in his writings. (8) Expressions probably or 
possibly medical. In the first of these classes the second list con- 
tains expressions peculiar to the writers in question, although not 
frequent in Luke. The figures state the number of times which 
the word occurs in that book or group ; and in fractions the upper 
figures indicates the number of times that the word occurs in the 
writings of Luke, the lower figure the number of times which it 
occurs elsewhere : e.g. in class 3 the fraction f means twice in 
Luke's writings and once in Hebrews ; and in classes 4 and 5 the 
fraction { means seven times in Luke's writings and four times in 
the other books of N.T. Where various readings render the exact 
proportions doubtful a "&" is placed in front of the fraction; eg. c. . 
In classes r and 2, when a reference to chapter and verse is given, 
this is the only instance of the use of the word in that book or group. 

(i) Expressions peculiar to S. Luke and S. Paul in N.T. 

S. LtTKft. 









aTLil 10 





dirb rov vtiv . 


xriii. 6 

2 Cor. T. 16 

drevlfeiv . 




*droToj , 

wffl, ^i 


2TL iiL 2 




Rom. XT. 24 





Rom. viii* 33 
Rom* iv* 18 





^py&fftd . 
tyurrdvai . 



Eph, iv. 19 
i Th. T. 3 

*^cru%t^y , 



I Th. iv. II 

ISoir ydp . 


iz. II 

2 Cor. vif. ii 

KttKOVpTfOt . 


2Tbk & 9 




Kardyeiw . 

V. If 



mnvr , 









A \6yot r. jripfar . 





I Cor. iv, 4 

All the above are proportionately common in S. Luke'f writings ; but there 
are many more which illustrate the affinities between the two writers ; e.g. 

drdTPOWf . 

draorarodr . 


droaroXiJ . 




I fldppapot . 
I " 



xxiii 14 
ix. 54 

xxiv. 25 
vi. ii 
xiv. 12 
xiv. 6 





i. 4 

ixiiL 41 


v. 7 

xiii. 15 

xxiiL 14 




XXT. 14 
xxiv. 23 

xxvi 19 


xxil 16 

xxiv. 16 

viil 30 



I Cor. xiv. 8 

1 Th. v. 3 


2 Cor. iii 14 



Phil, i 23 
Philem. 12 
Gai v. 12 



Rom. xi 9 
Rom. ix. 20 


Rom. i 30 
Eph. vi 9 

Rom. xi 15 
I Cor. vi II 


GaLii 17 
I Cor. ix. 10 

1 Th. v. 3 

2 Th. iii 2 



Phil. 1.4 


2 Tim. m. 6 
I Tim. iv. 13 

2 Tim. iii. 9 

1 Tim. vi 2 

2 Tun. iii. 2 

I Tim. i 19 


I Tim, vi 9 
i Tim. ii. i 









dtaTayj . 


frn<j>aiveur . 

#ei* T. 

Gtarpow , 


vovBeretr . 

iz. 60 

XV. 12 

xxiv. 27 
Ii. I 



xxiv. 49 
xviii. I 

xxii 25 
xvi. 8 
xiv. 7 


xix, 12 

V. 10 


xxii. 25 
xviii. 22 

xvi 4 
xii 45 
x. 42 
v. 17 

xxi. 26 



xix. 39 

XXL 5 

iv. ii 

xxiv. 4 

xxiv. 12 

xxvii. 20 
xxi 8 
xvii II 
xvii 23 
xviii 25 


vii 19 

XXli 22 

XX. 26 




xx. 31 
xxi 24 

Rom. ix. 17 
I Cor. xii II 
Rom. xiii a 



Rom. x.20 


1 Cor. ix. 21 



Rom. ii. 17 
Phiiii 16 

2 Cor. x. I 

2 Cor. xi 28 

Eph. iv. ii 
I Cor. i 26 

Rom. xii ii 


I Cor. iv. 9 
Rom. i 28 


I Cor. xv. 30 


Philem. 22 


a 7 
i Tim. vi 15 

2 Tim. Hi 1 7 

I Tim. !v. 16 
I Tim. ill. 5 


1 Urn. T. 4 

2 Tim. ii 36 
i Tim* vi 13 

I Tim, vi 15 

I Tim. i 7 
Tit ii 10 








Tdya . 



repiepyos . 

roAtnela . 






t 75 
iii. 14 

iv. 23 

xvii. 33 


vL 16 




XV. 2 


XXL 25 

xix. 13 
xxri 19 


x. xo 
xvii. 16 


xix. 19 
xx. 28 




IX. 21 

vii. 52 
xvii H 


xxiv. 2 
iv. 28 
xix. 36 

XVL 22 

xvii 23 


viii 23 
xix. 29 




2 Car. xit. I 
Eph. iv. 24 

Rom* xL 9 


lTh.iv. 2 

I Cor. xvi 6 
I Cor. xiii. 5 

Eph, iii. 15 

Eph. I 12 
Phil, i 27 


Philem. 9 




Rom. xiii 14 

2 Cor. xi 25 
2Th.ii. 4 

Eph. it 6 


Rom. viii. 26 

2 Cor. viii. 19 

2 Cor. u. 4 
I Cor. vii 29 

2 Tim. 11 19 

Tit iii. 12 

Tit iii I 
I Tim. v. 13 
I Tim. iii 13 


1 Tim. iv. 14 
Tit. ii 2 

2 Tim. iii 4 

2 Tim. iii 4 









ffvfMrlK6 , 

lli 22 

i Tim. iv. 8 

T& ff&rripiov 



Eph. vi 17 


xxvi 25 




Rom. i 23 



I Cor. vii 19 

dovvat T&TOV 

xiv, 9 


tf/3pis . 


2 Cor. xii 10 


vii 39 



zviii 5 

I Cor. fat. 27 


xxi. 4 




Rom. i 22 


xxviii a 



xvi 14 






i 17 

Eph. i. 8 






L 28 

Eph. i 6 


xiv. 23 

a Cor. viii 19 





(2) Expressions peculiar to S. Luke and S. Paul and the 
Epistle to the Hebrews. 









01 ty alrlar 


zix. 20 
xxi 28 



xvi 28 

viii 47 
XT. aa 
xxi 36 





xxv. 24 





aTh.i is 

a Cor. xii 8 

a 6 


^ 4 
Rom. XT. 27 


I Tim. T. 17 


I Urn. i 

aTim. i to 

viii 7 


vi 19 


Tii. 25 

x. ii 








L2 3 





2 Tim. it 6 


vwl . 




*6pffr . 

XxIL 22 


Rom.1 4 











2 Cor. iiL 16 

I Tim. iv. 13 


X. XI 



I Tim. v. 13 

xL 37 


xix. 9 

Rom. ix. 18 


rdw . 








Gal a 12 

2 Tim. ii. 10 


Xpfcu- . 

iv. 18 


2 Cor. i. 21 


(3) Expressions peculiar to S. Z*&V Writings and to the 
Epistle to the Hebrews* 

f, Iwpo- 


rvyxdmv, &v&rcpw t fatirtpot, and 


};. Excepting toaBcupclv, 
aircX^, all the above are 

(4) Expressions not found in the other Gospels and more frequent 
in S. Lukts Writings than in all the rest ofN.T. 

d-yoXX/cwwf, alveu'%, *&j>o,irfyvewh &vQ' &v{ t d^roXoyew-^oif, dd-^dXettt^, 

, flieurop- 

|, *0retpaf, ^rwavr^v^, ^rdp^eiv (excluding rd fardp- 
f, *iiro5^xe<r^aif, *OroXa^)5d>'ew'^, farotrrptyew*/ : and several others 
which occur twice in Luke and once elsewhere. All of these occur in LXX, 

(5) Expressions found in one or more of the other Gospels^ but men 
frequent in S. Lutes Writings than in all the rest of N.T. 



viverai covi ^., ewru, Sta/icpt^avf, Siavotyavy, 
Oiwurtojeivf, SiaTewrcrav^, 



l/corao-is |-, 
a>0a8ef, etay 

, 6jM.7rtfi7rA.avat, 

rats uepais, /ca0' 
yapf,, fyuma-fiosf, feaflaipetyf, KaTaA.v/xa|-, jcaravoetvf, 

y, ovo/Aart^|, op^Ssf, Travra^ovf, ctTretr or 

5v|- 5 ov rpO7roi/|-, 

, v^tcrro? -j, X a ^? 1/ l'j wcret ^.-jy. 
Excepting aKpij80Tpov, a^ecrts d/Aaprtcov, e^avr^s, ovd/zart, Tcrpapx^/s, 
and TO cf v/iSr, all the above are found in LXX, 

To these may be added a few which are specially frequent in 
Luke's writings, although not in excess of the rest of N.T. taken 
together: pxe<r0ai|^, &XP L ^flT> ^X Gr &uff> 7rtraarcriv|, 6 Xoyos 
rot) eovy!-, Xv^vosf, TrapayyeAAeiv-j-l-, TrpocrTrtTTTCtv^, TrpocrSfix^or^aty, 
oyi&wfa rp<f>Lv%, rpo^l, x^P ts twenty-five times in Lk. and Acts, 
not in Mt or Mk., and only thrice in JIL 

Phrases which indicate the expression of emotion are unusually 
common, and belong to the picturesqueness of Luke's style ; **. 
<o/?05 /xeyasy, X a / a /^cyotXi? Or TroAA^*, ^CDVT) /zeyaA.17 ^f-. 

Equally remarkable is his fondness for d^p, where others have 
aV0pa>7ros or els or nothing. Thus, vL 8 rw dv^pt, Mt. and Mk. r<3 
&vQpu>ir<p ', viiL 27 dn}p rts, Mk. av^pcoTros ; ix. 38 dnfp, Mt. av^pcoTros, 
ML cts; xxiii. 50 dvifp, Mt av0pa)7ros, Mk. nothing. Comp. v, 8, 
12, 18, viiL 38, ix. 30, xxii. 63 : and the word is very much more 
frequent in Lk. than in all the other Gospels together. 

The expression Trak a^rov or trov in the sense of "God's servant" 
is peculiar to Lk. in N.T. (L 54, 69 ; Acts iii. 13, 26, iv, 25, 27, 30), 
with the exception of Mt xii 18, which is a quotation from Is. 
xliL i. 

(6) Expressions Jrcqttcni in S. Lutes Writing* and probably 
due to Hebrew Influence. 

The frequent use of cyevcro is discussed at the end of ch. i 
Add to this Luke's fondness for IPCOTTIOT, which does not occur 
in Mt or Mk. and only once in Jn. (xx, 30). It is found more 
than thirty times in Lk. and Acts, especially in the phrase ci/cmoy 
rov eov (L 19, 75, xii. 6, xvi. 15) or xvptov (i. 15). With this com- 


pare irpo irpoo-uirov nvfe (vil 27, ix. 52, x. i) and Kara 
TTOV TIVOS (il 31). The frequent use of iSov (i. 38, ii 34, 48, 
vii- 2 5> 27, 34, etc,) and *at IBov (i. 20, 31, 36, ii, 25, v. 12, vii. 12, 
37, etc.); of pijfjia, for the matter of what is spoken (L 65, ii. 15, 
i9i 51); of olicos in the sense of " family * (I 27, 33, 69, ii. 4, 
x. 5, xix. 9) ; of Is in the sense of TO (v. 12, 17, viii. 22, xiii. 10, 
xx. i) or of TrpojToj (xxiv. i); of {tyioTTos for "the Most High" 
(i 3 2 > 35* 76, vi. 35), illustrates the same kind of influence. So 
also do such expressions as iroteiv eAeos /xcra (i. 72, x. 37) 

and fJLy(L\VVLV IA.OS /XTCt (L 58) j irOllV Kp<XTOS (L 51) j K 

/coiX/as ft^T/oo? (i. 15); combinations with !J>T$ /capStp or cv 
rcus ic., such as SioXoyeo-ftu (Hi. 15, v. 22; comp. xxiv. 38), StaT??- 
piv (ii 51), 0<r0ai (L 66, xxi. 14), crvv/3aXh.w (ii. 19); ev rats 
fotpaw (L 5, 39, ii. i, B iv. 2, 25, v. 35, etc.); T^ ^ipa TOV <ra^- 
fidrov (xiiL 14, 16, xiv. 5); with perhaps Sia o-To/iaTos (i, 70), 
where both the expression and the omission of the article seem to 
be Hebraistic : in LXX we commonly have, however, h r<3 <rnfym 
or K rov oro/Aaros. Nearly all these expressions are found in the 
Acts also, in some cases very often. The frequent use of peri- 
phrastic tenses has been pointed out above (p. Ii) as being due 
in many cases to Hebraistic influence. The same may be said of 
the attributive or characterizing genitive, which is specially common 
in Luke (iv. 22, xvi. 8, 9, xviii 6; comp. x. 6, xx. 34, 36); 
and of the frequent use of /ecu avros (ii, 28, v. i, 17, viii. i, 22, 
xvii. n, xix. 2), KCU avrij (ii. 37), and KCU avrot (xiv. i, xxiv. 14) 
after lyeVcro, Kol ISov, and the like. Phrases like &ogdetv rov 
eoV (v. 25, 26, vii, 16, xiiL 13, xvii. 15, xviii. 43, xxiii. 47), 6 
Xoyos rov ov (v. I, viii. n, 21, xi. 28), and carcupeiv r^v 
<o>vi7v (xi. 27) may be placed under the same head; and they all 
of them occur several times in the Acts. 

In common with other N.T. writers S. Luke usss several 
Hebrew words, which may be mentioned here, although they are 
not specially common in his writings: apty (iv. 24, xu. 37, xviii. 
17, etc.), /See&r/JoA (xi. 15, 18, 19), ywi/a (xii. 5), Tracr^ (ii. 4i s 
xxii 1, 7, 8, II, 13, IS), o-a^arov (iv. 16, 31, vi. I, 2, 5, 6 t 7, 9, 
etc.), a-aravas (x. 18, xi. 18, xiii* 16, etc.). Three others -occur 
once in his Gospel and nowhere else in N.T. ; yffaros (xvi 6), 
Kopos (xvi, 7;* crLKcpa (i. 15). Other words, although Greek in 
origin, are used by him, as by other N.T. writers, in a sense wbich 
is due to Hebrew influence; ayycAos (i. ii, 13, 18, etc.), yp-p- 
/Aaros (v. 21, 30, vi. 7, ix. 22, etc.), 8ia/3oXos (iv. 2-13, viii. 12), 
ZOvij fii. 32, xviii. 32, xxi. 24 its, etc.), elpyvq (L 79, ii. 29, viL 5.0, 
etc.), Kvpio* (i. 6, 9, ii, 15, eta) ; and !<^pta (i. 5, 8) is a Greik 
pord specially formed to express a Hebrew idea. 


(7) Miscellaneous Expressions and Constructions which are 
specially frequent in S. Lukfs Writings. 

In his use of the article he has several favourite constructions. 
He is very fond of kv TO> followed by a present infinitive to express 
time during which (i. 8, 21, ii. 6, 43, v. i, 12, viii. 5, 42, etc.) or 
by an aorist infinitive to express time after which (ii. 27, iii 21, 
ix. 34, 36, xi. 37, etc.); also of rov with an infinitive to express 
purpose or result (i. 73, ii. 27, v. 7, xii. 42, etc.). He frequently 
employs TO to introduce a whole clause, especially interrogations, 
much as we use inverted commas (i. 62, ix. 46, xix. 48, xxii. 2, 4, 

23, 24, 37)- 

In the case of certain verbs he has a preference for special 
constructions. After verbs of speaking, answering, and the like 
he very often has TTJOOS and the accusative instead of the simple 
dative. Thus, we have &K&V vpos (i. 13, 18, 28, 34, 6r, il 15, 
34, 48, 49, etc.), AoXco' vpo<s (i. 19, 55, ii. 18, 20, xii. 3, etc.), \iyw 
fl-po's (iv. 21, v. 36, vii. 24, viii. 25, ix. 23, etc.), cwn>*piVr0<u IT/DOS 
(iv. 4, vi. 3, xiv. 5), yoyyv&w ?r/>os (v. 30), <TW^TIV irpos (xxii 23), 
crvvXaXctv wpos (iv. 36). It often happens that where Mt or Mk 
has the dative, Luke has the accusative with wpos (Mt ix.ii; Mk 
u. 16; Lk. v. 30). Whereas others prefer ^Ipx^o-Oai CK, he hat 
l&PXearOat airo (iv. 35, 41, v. 8, viii. 2, 29, 33, 35, 38, ix. 5, etc.), 
and for ftau/xafciv TI he prefers Oavp.a.&iv eirlnvi (ii. 33, iv. 22, 
ix. 43, xx 26). For Gepairevew vo<rov<s he sometimes has fapairMLv 
airo VO'OXDV (v. 15, vii. 21, viiL 2). He is fond of the infinitive after 
&aro (ii 4, viii. 6, ix. 7, xi. 8, xviii. 5, etc.), fiera TO (xiL 5, xxii 
20), and vpo rov (iL 21, xxii. 15). The quite classical %& n k 
common (viL 42, ix. 58, xi. 6, xii. 17, 50, xiv. 14). His use of the 
optative has been mentioned above (p. Ii). 

Participles with the article often take the place of substantives 
(ii. 27, iv. 1 6, yiii 34, xxii. 22, xxiv. 14). They are frequently 
added to verbs in a picturesque and classical manner: dvcurravTcs 
egeftaXov (iv. 29), fca&Vas cStSaoTcei/ (v. 3), ora0 eiceXevo-cv (xviii. 
40), aT/>a<^cts irriiMi<rv (ix. 55), etc. They are sometimes strung 
together without a conjunction (ii 36, iv. 35, v. n, 19, 25, etc.). 

S. Luke is very fond of Tras, and especially of the stronger 
form a?ras. It is not always easy to determine which is the right 
reading; but cums is certainly very common (iii. 21, iv. 6, v. 26, 
viii. 37, ix. 15, xix. 37, 48, xxiii i; also in Acts). Elsewhere in 
N.T. ewras is rare. Not unfrequently Luke has TTOS or cwras where 
the others have nothing (iii. 15, 16, 21, iv. 37, v* IT, 28, vi 4, 10, 
X 7i r 9t 3> TO- 35> etc -)' ^s 6 Aao's and on-as 6 A. are very freq. 

In the use of certain prepositions he has some characteristic 
expressions : eis TO wra (i. 44, ix. 44) and ci? ras dxoa? (vii i), Iv 
rots (o<rtv (iv. 21) and cv /iry (ii 46, yiii. 7, x 3, xxi 21, xxii 27, 55, 


36); KoTot TO Was (I 9, ii. 42, xxii. 39), TO tWurpivar (it 
TO iu>0o$ (iv. 16), TO tlpqiJLbov (ii. 24), and TO wpurpwov (xxii. 22) j 
ira/>& TOVST iroSas (vii. 38, viii. 35, 41, xyil 16), whereas Mark has 
wpos T. iro8a9 B (v. 22, viL 25). Luke is very fond of <rw, which 
is rather rare in the other Gospels but is very frequent in both of 
Luke's writings. Sometimes he has ow where the others have 
/Ara (viii. 38, 51, xxiL 14, 56) or KO (xx. i) or nothing (v. 19). 

The pronouns awfe (see below) and oSros are specially common. 
The latter is added to a numeral, rpCrrjv ravrrjv ypepav (xxiv. 21), 
to make it more definite, rk vp&v; is almost peculiar to him 

(xi. 5, xil 25, xiv. 28, xv. 4, xvii. 7), and so also is TIS Icrnv 
os; (v. 21, vii. 49). The indefinite ns with nouns is freq. 

In using conjunctions he is very fond of combining Se with feat, 
a combination which occurs twenty-six times in his Gospel (ii 4, 
iiL 9, 12, iv, 41, v. 10, 36, vi. 6, ix. 61, etc.) and seven in the Acts. 
It is rare in the other Gospels. His Hebraistic use of *al afro'?, 
avTTJ or avrot, and of /cat tSov, to introduce the apodosis to ^yo/ero 
and the like, has been pointed out above (p. bci). But Luke is 
also fond of Kal euro's at the beginning of sentences or independent 
clauses (L 17, 22, iil 23, iv. 15, v. 37, vi. 20, xv. 14, etc.), and 
of KOI O^TO?, which is peculiar to him (L 36, viii. 41 ?, xvL i, 
xx. 28). In quoting sayings he most frequently uses S, and etircv 
8e occurs forty-six times in the Gospel and fourteen in the Acts. 
It is not found in Mt or Mk., and perhaps only once in Jn. 
(xil 6 [viii. ii,1 ix. 37 ?) : they prefer 6 & cfcrev, or *eu Xy^ K.T.X. 
Luke also has eXcyev oe nine times in the Gospel; it occurs twice 
in Mk , once in Jn., and never in Mt. Five times he begins a 
sentence with Kal u>$ (temporal), which is not found elsewhere in 
N.T. (xv. 25, xix. 41, xxii. 66, xxiii. 26; Acts i. 10). The inter- 
rogative ci is found eighteen times in Gospel and Acts (vi. 7, 9, 
xiil 23, xiv. 28, 31, xxii. 49, 67, etc.),^ 8c/i^y five times, and ci 
apa twice. All of these are comparatively rare elsewhere. 

The idiomatic attraction of the relative is very common in both 
books (i. 4, ii. 20, iii 19, v. 9, ix. 36, 43, xii. 46, xv. 16, xix. 37, 
etc.) : it is rare in Mt and Mk., and is not common in Jn. 

After TOVTO he has OTI in Gospel and Acts (x. n, xiL 39, etc.) ; 
Mt. and Mk. never ; Jn. only after 8ta TOVTO. 

He is fond of combinations of cognate words, e.g. ^vAao-owra? 
as (iL 8), tyofirjOya'a.v <o/?ov fwyav ^ii. 9), jSaTrTtar^o^rcs TO pdir- 
(vii. 29), 17 aarTpairij ao^rpdirrowra (xvii. 24). Some of these 
are Hebraistic, especially such as N &ri0v/if<p facdv/Aqcra (xxii 15). 

(8) Expressions probably or possibly medical. 

It was perhaps not until 1841 that attention was called to the 
existence of medical phraseology in the writings of S. Luke. In the 


Gentlemarfs Magazine for June 1841 a paper appeared on the 
subject, and the words dxX-us (Acts xiii. n), KpafiroA^ (Lk. xxi. 34), 

Tra/jaXeXv/^eVos (v. 1 8, 24; Acts viil. 7, ix. 33), 7ra/>ofw//.os (Acts 
XV. 39), o~uvxofj,vv] irvpera) /^cyaAa) (Lk. iv. 38), and vSpviriKos 
(xiv. 2) were given as instances of technical medical language. 
Since then Dr. Plumptre and others have touched on the subject ; 
and in 1882 Dr. Hobart published his work on The Medical 
Language of St. Luke, Dublin and London. He has collected 
over 400 words from the Gospel and the Acts, which in the main 
are either peculiar to Luke or are used by him more often than 
by other N.T. writers, and which are also used (and often very 
frequently) by Greek medical writers. He gives abundant quota- 
tions from such writers, that we may see for ourselves ; and the 
work was well worth doing. But there can be no doubt that the 
number of words in the Gospel and the Acts which are due to 
the Evangelist's professional training is something very much less 
than this. It may be doubted whether there are a hundred such 
words. But even if there are twenty-five, the fact is a considerable 
confirmation of the ancient and universal tradition that " Luke the 
beloved physician" is the author of both these books. Of 
Dr. Hobart's long list of words more than eighty per cent are 
found in LXX, mostly in books known to S. Luke, and sometimes 
occurring very frequently in them. In all such cases it is more 
reasonable to suppose that Luke's use of the word is due to his 
knowledge of LXX, rather than to his professional training. In 
the case of some words, both of these causes may have been at 
work. In the case of others, the medical training, and not famili- 
arity with LXX, may be the cause. But in most cases the prob- 
ability is the other way. Unless the expression is known to be 
distinctly a medical one, if it occurs in books of LXX which were 
known to Luke, it is probable that his acquaintance with the ex- 
pression in LXX is the explanation of his use of it If the expres- 
sion is also found in profane authors, the chances that medical 
training had anything to do with Lk.'s use of it become very 
remote. It is unreasonable to class as in any sense medical such 
words as d0/>ot&y, dfccn?, dvaipctv, avaXa/i/Saveu', avop0ow, aTratrctv, 
diraXXdcrcrew, cwroAikiv, diropew, acr^aXaa, averts, etc. etc. All of 

these are frequent in LXX, and some of them in profane authors 

Nevertheless, when Dr. Hobart's list has been well sifted, there 
still remains a considerable number of words, the occurrence or 
frequency of which in S. Luke's writings may very possibly be due 
to the fact of his being a physician. The argument is a cumulat- 
ive one. Any two or three instances of coincidence with medical 
writers may be explained as mere coincidences : but the large 
number of coincidences renders this explanation unsatisfactory for 


all of them ; especially where the word is either rare in LXX, or 
not found there at all. 

The instances given in the Gentleman's Magazine require a 
word of comment. Galen in treating of the diseases of the eye 
gives ax^'s as one of them, and repeatedly uses the word, which 
occurs nowhere else in N.T. or LXX. Perhaps KpanraXrj, which 
in bibl. Grk. is found Lk, XXL 34 only, is a similar instance. It 
occurs more than once in Aristophanes, but is frequent in medical 
writers of the nausea which follows excess. In wapaXeXv/xevos we 
have a stronger instance. Whereas the other Evangelists use 
irctjoaAun/cos, Luke in harmony with medical usage has irapaXeXv- 
/ncW, as also has Aristotle, a physician's son (Eth* Nic. i. 13. 15). 
But this use may come from LXX, as in Heb. xiL 12. That vapo- 
gva-fjios is a medical term is indisputable ; but as early as Demos- 
thenes it is found in the sense of exasperation, as also in LXX 
'Deut, xxix. 28 ; Jer. xxxix. [xxxii.] 37). The instance in Lk. iv. 38 
is perhaps a double one : for crvvexppewi is possibly, and irvperox 
ftcyoXw probably, a medical expression. Moreover, here Mt. and 
Mk. have merely Trvp^cro-ovcra, and in Acts xxviii. 8 we have the 
parallel frvpcrots KOL Svorcirepilp crwxo//.vov. In vSpcoiriKos we have 
a word peculiar to Luke in bibL Grk. and perhaps of purely 
medical origin. 

By adopting doubtful or erroneous readings Hobart makes other instances 
double, *.-. &IT&CWW for &re<rev (Acts xm. 1 1 ), /3apw0w<rip for pafnj$Q<nv (Lk. 
xxi. 34). Again, whether or no dvairrfoffetv has any medical flavour, Lk. 
iv. 17 must not be quoted in connexion with it, for there the true reading is 

To the examples given in the Gcntlemafts Magazine may per- 
haps be added such instances as SafcrvA-o) irpocnffafaLv (xL 46), where 
Mt has SaKTuA.0) KWTJCTCLL: Sta rpif^aroj /feXrfyq? (xviii. 25^, where Mk. 
has Bio. Tpv/zoAias pa<tSos : eo"rr) y pwrts TOV at/wtros (viu. 44), where 
Mk. has IfypavQ'q - Tnjy^ T. at/xaros : ccrrp<o^jorav ai /?aaris a^rov 
KOL TO. <r^vSpa (Acts iii. 7) ; and more doubtfully ofloVqv rcobapa-w 
dpxat? KdOifywov (Acts x. n) and wvuiQurw (viL 14; Acts ix. 40). 

Luke alone relates what may be called the surgical miracle of 
the healing of Malchus' ear (xxiL 51). And perhaps the marked 
way in which he distinguishes demoniacal possession from disease 
(vi. 18, xiii. 32 ; Acts xix. 12) may be put down to medical train- 
ing. His exactness in stating how long the person healed had been 
afflicted (xiii. n ; Acts ix. 33) and the age of the person healed 
(viiL 42 ; Acts iv. 22) is a feature of the same kind. For other 
possible instances see notes on iv. 35, v. 12, vii. 10. 

The coincidences between the preface of the Gospel and the 
opening words of some medical treatises are remarkable (see small 
print, pp. 5, 6). And it is worth noting that Luke alone records 
Christ's quotation of the proverb, larpc, Otpawcwratr 


(IT. 23) ; and that almost the last words that he records in the 
Acts are S. Paul's quotation from Is. vi, which ends xoi tocro/ioi 
(xxviii. 26, 27), 

The following table will illustrate some characteristics of S. 
Luke's diction as compared with that of the other Synoptists : 


iii. 10. ijfy ^. 
iii. 16. TvevfM 6eoO. 
iii. 17. 0Hj tf r. c 
if. i. 


fr- : 

iv. 18. T^JV fldXiuwaF. 
iv. 20, - 
viii. 2. 
* poovrtm c 

ix. 2. r/xxr^por a^rf 

k. 7. 
ii. 8. 

ix. 9. Ma^^aio 

xii. 50. ri tf faijfM r. rar* 

xiil 19. r, Xo^oy r. 

xiii. 20. 

xiil. 21. fficavfa\LttTtu, 

T. 15* 

viii. 21. 

v 3 
ix. 18. Wo* 

X. 14. 


L 10. ri TFCV/IO. 

L II. ^MF^ & r. otfpa- 


iii. 9. ^ ^ /rat 
iii 22. r6 TV. 
iii. 22. <^r 


iv. L 


L 14. 

L 16. 

i. 1 8. d<p fares rd oY/crua. 

i. 40. Xer/>6r 

iv. 14. 
v. I. 
v. II. 
V. 12. 


iL 3 . 


v. 14. 

li 12. 47^17 xat J^j. 
il 10. 

v. 25. Tapaxprjpa 
v. 26. 

ii. 14. 
iii. 35. r6 
iv. ;. 

iv. 14. 

ir. 16. 
iv. 17. 

iv. 38. 
v. 7 
v. 1 1 . 

v. 27. dr<5/taTt Aevelx. 
viii. 21. r6x X^ITOF r 
viii. 7. IF pl?^ r. 

viii. 13. 

viii. 13. 

viii. 16. 

viii. 28. 

Tin. 32- 


v. 22. tpxcrai &TWV dp- viii. 41. <cal < 
yjLffwwy&yw Kol Tclvra dp^pxal oSror 
rp6j Toi>t r6^aj aurov. flrvva7&ry^s y TT TJ 

re^tby vapd ro^j 


v. 29. 

Vl II. 


viii. 29. 

viii. 42. 
viil 44. 
-riy ij 
ix. 5. 

ix. 2a 





xvii. 4. *z5pte. 
xvii. 16. 
xvii. 18. 
xix. 13. 
xxii. 18. yok 

xxvi. 20. /MT& r. 

xxvi. 27. Xaj3<6r. 

xxvL 29. 06 /*4 dr* dpri. 

xxvi. 41. 

xxvi. 64. dr &pn. 
xxvil 2. dr^yayow al 
rap^w/cap IletXdry. 

xzvil 13. 

xxvii. 57. Wpwrot r\o6- 
rtoj, rativo/M 'lawnj^. 

xxviii. 8. dTeX0oftr<u . . . 
drayyeiAcu TO*I 

tifl. 30. 

ix, 18. ttra, 
ix. 27. 

x, 13. 
xii. 15. 

xiv. 17. 

xiv. 23. 
xiv. 25. 

adv. 38. 


xv. I. drjjrry/tar 

zv. 4. 

xv. 43. 

xvi 8. 


ix. 21. 
ix. 27. X^yv 


ix. 33. 
ix. 40. 

ix. 42. Ldffaro rbr 

xviii. 15. 
xx. 23. 

xxii. 14. ol dn-6(rroXot 
ffd? airry. 

xxii. 17. Se^djUevos. 
xxii. 18. ) /i^ dxi rod 

xxii. 46. 

XXlL 69. dflO TOU 

xxiii. I. 

vtrrbv irl r. 

xxiiL 9. 
70*? i/coyoij, 

xxiii. 50. xai ' 

'I., j 

w A<5- 

xxiv. 9. j r0crr ( 7/^'tt<ra* 
. . . dT^}y*'\iy ravro 
rdvTa ro?s ^KL ical 
TO-U> roil \v>irtt i . 

These are only specimens taken from a huge iwnber of 
instances, and selected for their brevity and the ease \rit,i \rhkb 
they admit of comparison. The student who has mastaed tns 
main features of Luke's style will be able to fird many nor' iv 


This question may be regarded as naturally Mowing tin els- 
cussion of S. Luke's peculiarities and characteristics, for ii is bv a 
knowledge of these that we are able to solve it The quest\oi hov 
been keenly debated during the last forty years, and may now os 
said to be settled, mainly through the exertions cf v olkmar, 
Hilgenfeld, and Sanday. Dr. Sanday's article m die Fwtnighti? 
Review, June 1875, in answer to Supernatural Religion, was p^o- 
nounced by Bishop Lightfoot to be "able and (as it seems to m^ 
unanswerable" (On Sup. Rtl p. 186). This article was incoj 


porated in The Gospels in the Second Century, Macmillan, 1896, 
now unfortunately out of print, and it remains unanswered. It is 
now conceded on all sides 1 that Marcion's Gospel does not 
represent the original S. Luke, and that our Third Gospel has 
not been largely augmented and interpolated, especially by the 
addition of the first three chapters and the last seven verses , but 
that Marcion's Gospel is an abridgment of our S. Luke, which 
therefore was current before Marcion began to teach in Rome in 
or before A.D. 140. The statements of early Christian writers (not 
to be accepted as conclusive without examination) have been 
strongly confirmed, and it is right to speak of Marcion's Gospel as 
a " mutilated " or " amputated " edition of S Luke. 

Irenaeus says of Marcion id quod est seiundum Liicam evangehttm 
cirLumcidens (i 27 2, m. 12 7) ; and again Marcion et qui ab eo su-nt, ad 
intercidendas conversi sunt Scnpturas, quasdam qiudem in totitm non cog- 
noscenteS) secundum Lucam aittem evangehum et epistolas Pauh debutantes, 
kac sola legitima esse duunt t qua ipsi minoi averunt (in 12. 12). Similaily 
Tertulhan: Quis tarn cotnesor mus Ponticus quam qiu evangeha corrosit 9 
(Adv. Marcion i. i). Marcion evangeho suo nullum ads^r-ilnt auUoi em 
. . . e x us commentatonbus quos habemus I ucam mdetur Mat Lion elegisse 
quern caderet (ibid, iv 2) . Epiphamus also 6 /ze*> yap xapanryp roO Kara AOI>A.O> 

r^Xos, Iparlov peppdyptvov fob TroXXwv ffyr&v tirx L T0jf Tponov {lite? i. 3 n, 
Migne, xli 709). Epiphamus speaks of additions, ra 5 TrpwTiQt\vi.v but these 
were very trifling, perhaps only some two or three dozen words. 

The evidence of Tertullian and Epiphamus as to the contents 
of Marcion's Gospel is quite independent, and it can be checked 
to some extent by that of Irenseus. Then agreement is remark- 
able, and we can determine with something like certainty and 
exactness the parts of the Third Gospel which Marcion omitted ; 
not at all because he doubted their authenticity, but because he 
disliked their contents. They contradicted his doctrine, or did 
not harmonize well with it, or in some other way displeased him. 
In this arbitrary manner he discarded i. li. and m. excepting m. i, 
with which his Gospel began. Omitting m. 2-iv. 13, 17-20, 24, 
he went on continuously to xi. 28. His subsequent omissions 
were xi. 29-32, 49-5 1 * xm - I "9^ 2 9-35> xv - n-3 2 r xvii. 5-10, 
xvih 31-34, xix. 29-48, xx. 9-18, 37, 38, xxi. 1-4, 18, 21, 22, 
xxii. 16-18, 28-30, 35-38, 49-51, xxiv. 47-53* Perhaps he also 
omitted vh. 29-35 , and he transposed iv. 27 to xvh. 18. 

It should be observed that not only does Marcion's Gospel 

1 An exception must be made of the author of 77ie Four Gospeh as 
Historical Records, Norgate, 1895, pp. 93-95. The work is retrogrades and 
rakes together criticisms and positions which have been rendered impotent and 
untenable. One is tempted to apply to it the author's own words (respecting a 
volume of very real merit and ability, which has rendered signal service to the 
cause of truth), that it "may be said, without much injustice, to beg t\ery 
question with which it deals " (jp. 491). 


contain nearly all the sections which are peculiar to Luke, but it 
contains them in the same order. Where Luke inserts something 
into the common tradition, Marcion has the insertion ; where Luke 
omits, Marcion omits also. This applies in particular to "the 
great ^ intercalation " (ix. si-xviii. 14) as well as to smaller 
insertions; and this minute agreement, step by step, between 
Marcion and Luke renders the hypothesis of their independence 
incredible. The only possible alternatives are that Marcion has 
expurgated our Third Gospel, 'or that our Third Gospel is an 
expansion of Marcion's; and it can be demonstrated that the 
second of these is untenable. 

(1) In most cases we can see why Marcion omitted what his 
Gospel did not contain. He denied Christ's human birth; 
therefore the whole narrative of the Nativity and the genealogy 
must be struck out The Baptism, Temptation, and Ascension 
involved anthropomorphic views which he would dislike. All 
allusions to the O.T. as savouring of the kingdom of the Demiurge 
must be struck out And so on. In this way most of the 
omissions are quite intelligible. The announcement of the 
Passion (xviii. 31-34) and the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, etc. 
(xix. 29-48), were probably disliked as being fulfilments of O.T. 
prophecy. It is lesb easy to see Marcion's objection to the 
Prodigal Son (xv. 11-32) and the massacre of Galileans, etc. 
(xiii. 1-9) ; but our knowledge of his strange tenets is imperfect, 
and these passages probably conflicted with some of them. But 
sach changes as "all the righteous" for "Abraham and Isaac and 
Jacob and at the prophets 1 ' (xiii. 28), or "the Lord's words" for 
"the law" (xvi. 17), or "those whom the god of that world shall 
account worthy " for " they that are accounted worthy to attain to 
that world" (xx. 35), are thoroughly intelligible. Others which his 
critics supposed to be wilful depravations of the text are mere 
differences of reading found in other authorities ; eg. the omission 
of aluviov (x. 25) and of rj /lepomyv (xii. 14) ; and the insertion of 
/cat KaraAvoKra TOV VO/JLOV KCU rows vpo^yras (xxiii. 2)* 

(2) But the chief evidence (in itself amounting to something 
like demonstration) that Marcion abridged our S. Luke, rather 
than the Evangelist expanded Marcion, is found in the peculiarities 
and characteristics of Luke's style and diction. These run through 
our Gospel from end to end, and on the average are as frequent in 
the portions which Marcion omitted as in the rest In die first 
two chapters they are perhaps somewhat more frequent than else- 
where. It is quite incredible that the supposed interpolator made 
a minute analysis of the style and diction of Marcion's Gospel, 
practised himself in it, and then added those portions of our 
Gospel which Marcion did not include in his Gospel : and that he 
accomplished ibis feat without raising a suspicion. Such a feat in 


that age would have been a literary miracle. Only those who 
have worked through the passages expunged by Marcion, carefully 
marking what is peculiar to Luke or characteristic of him, can 
estimate the full force of this argument. But the analysis of a few 
verses will be instructive. 

The dotted lines indicate that the expression is found more 
often in Luke's writings than in the rest of N.T., and the fraction 
indicates the proportion: eg. the with /ca^ctXcv means that 
Ko,6<upv occurs six times in Lk. and Acts, and three elsewhere in 
the rest of N.T. The plain lines indicate that the expression is 
peculiar to Luke in N.T., and the figure states the number of 
times in which it occurs in his writings : e.g. Kara TO I0os occurs 
thrice in Lk. and Acts, and nowhere else in N.T. 

oWaoras atro 0p6Vo>v, ical 

dyaflwv, KCU irXovrovVras e&MrcoretXev ^ jcevov?. dvreXa- 
/?ero "la-paiyX iraiSos-J- avrov, fivrjcrOfycu. cXcov? (jca#a>s cXaX??o-cv 
Tpos rovs Trarepas ^/xaiv) ra> 'A/Jpaa/i /cat r< oirep/Aart avrov ct? rov 
atcoi/cu E/ictvev Si Mapta/i crvv ^-| avrg W9 jRP'a? V T P" S > xa ^ 

V7r<TT/)^V ^f CIS TOV oT/COV aVT^S (L $256). 

Kat tTToptvovTO oZ yov<i5 avrov icar* eros-jj- cfe *Icpov<raX^ r^ 
copr^ rov 7rdfr)(a m KOL &rc eyevcro ^ra)K-||- ScoSe/ca, dva^atvovrwr 
avraJi/ /cara TO 6^093 r$; copras, /cat TcXctaxravrcov raff 
^v r<3 wrooTpe^tv ^ avrous VTrc/iavev l^erovs 6 
/cat oux ^yvcocrav ot yoveis avrov' vo/Auravrcs |- Sc avrov cv rg 
ctyai iJXdov fjfJLtpas oS6v 9 /cat CU/C^T/TOW 3 avrov ev rots crvyycvco't /cat 
rols 2 yvoorois* ^ /cat /4^ cvpovres v^reoTpc^av ^ ct 'IcpovcraX^ 
avrov. ical l^evero ^tcd* ^/iepas rpets, cvpov avrov 

rco lepaJ, ica^c^o/icvov cv /^co*fp TCOV StSaovcaXcov, ical dicovovra avra)y y /cal 
facpcarwra avrovs* ef tcrrarro ^ Si jravres ot dicovovrff avrov M 
rfi <rw<ru icat ratf dvoxpurco-tv avrov (ii 4.1-47). 


The authorities quoted for the various readings are taken from 
different sources, of which Tischendorf s Nov. Test. Grate, vol. L 
ed. 8, Lipsiae, 1869, and Sandals App. ad^Nov. Test. Stcfh., 
Oxonii, 1889, ^9 tne chief. The Patristic evidence has been in 
many cases verified Gregor/s Prolegomena to Tischendorf 
Lipsise, 1884-94, and Miller's edition of Scrivener's Introduction 
to the Criticism of N.T., Bell, 1894, must be consulted by those 
who desire more complete information respecting the authorities. 

a] THE TEXT bod 

Primary uncials. 

K Cod. Sinaiticus, saec. iv. Brought by Tischendorf from the 
Convent of St Catherine on Mt Sinai; now at St Peters- 
burg, Contains the whole Gospel complete. 
Its correctors are 
It* contemporary, or nearly so, and representing a second 

MS. of high value ; 

K % attributed by Tischendorf to sac. vi. ; 
IP attributed to the beginning of saec, viL Two hands of 
about this date are sometimes distinguished as K* 

A. Cod. Alexandrinus, saec. v. Once in the Patriarchal Library 

at Alexandria ; sent by Cyril Lucar as a present to Charles i. 
in 1628, and now in die British Museum. Complete. 

B. Cod. Vaticanus, ssec. iv. In the Vatican Library certainly 

since 1533 1 (Batiffol, La Vatican* de Paul Hi, etc., p. 86). 

The corrector B 3 is nearly of the same date and used a 
good copy, though not quite so good as the original 
Some six centuries later the faded characters were 
retraced, and a few new readings introduced by B 3 . 

C Cod. Ephraemi Rescriptus, saec. v. In the National Library 
at Paris. Contains the following portions of the Gospel : 
L 2-ii. 5, ii. 42-iii. 21, iv. 25-vi. 4, vi. 37-vil 16 or 17, 
viil 2&-xiL 3, xix. 42-30. 27, xxl 2i-rriL 19, xxiii 25* 
xxiv. 7, xxiv. 46-53- 

These four MSS. are parts of what were once complete Bibles, 
and are designated by the same letter throughout the LXX 

D. Cod Bezae, saec. vi. Given by Beza to the University 
Library at Cambridge 1581. Greek and Latin. Contains 
the whole Gospel 

L. Cod. Regius Pansiensis, saec. viii National Library at Paris. 
Contains the whole Gospel 

R. Cod. Nitriensis Rescriptus, saec. viil Brought from a convent 
in the Nitrian desert about 1847, an ^ now in the British 
Museum. Contains L 1-13, L 69-11 4, 16-27, iv. 38-v. 5, 
v. 25-vi 8, 18-36, 39, vL 49-vil 22, 44* 4$, 47 viii. 5-15, 
?iiL 25-ix. i, ia-43, * 3-" l6 > ** S* 2 ?* L 4-15* 4Q-5 2 > 
xiiL 26-xiv. i, riv. i2-xr, i, xv. 13-xvL 16, xviL 2i-xviii. 10, 
xviiL 22-XJL 20, xx. 33-47, XXL la-xxil 15, 42-56, xxii. 71- 
xxiiL 11, 38-51. By a second hand xv. 19-21. 

T. Cod. Borgianus, saec. v. In the Library of die Propaganda at 
Rome. Greek and Egyptian. Contains xxiL ao-aodii 20. 


X. Cod Monacensis, saec ix. In the University Library at 
Munich. Contains L 1-37, ii. iQ-iiL 38, iv. ai-x. 37, 
XL i-xviii. 43, xx. 46-xxiv. 53. 

A. Cod. Sangallensis, saea ix. In the monastery of St Gall in 
Switzerland Greek and Latin. Contains the whole 

U. Cod Zacynthius Rescriptus, sasc. viiL In the Library of the 
Brit, and For. Bible Soc. in London. Contains L 1-9, 
19-23, 27, 28, 30-32, 36-66, L 77-ii 19, 21, 22, 33-39, 
iii. 5-8, 11-20, iv. i, 2, 6-20, 32-43, v. 17-36, vi. 21- 
vii- 6, 11-37, 39-47, viii. 4-21, 25-35, 43~5 1-28, 
3 2 33> 35> 4i-* l8 "-40 xL i, i, & 4, 24-30, 31, 32, 


If these uncials were placed in order of merit for the textual 
criticism of the Gospel, we should have as facile princeps B, with 
K as equally easily second Then T, B, L, C, R. The Western 
element which sometimes disturbs the text of B is almost entirely 
absent from the Gospels. 

Secondary Uncials. 

E. Cod. Basileensis, saec. viii. In the Public Library at Basle. Contains 

the whole Gospel, except iii. 4-15 and xxiv. 47-53. 

F. Cod. Boreeh, saec. ix. In the Public Library at Utrecht Contains 

considerable portions of the Gospel. 

G. Cod. Harleianus, saec. ix. In the British Museum. Contains considerable 

K. Cod. Cyprius, saec. ix. In the National Library at Paris. Contains the 

whole Gospel. 
M. Cod. Campianus, ssec. ix. In the National Library at Paris. Contains 

the whole GospeL 
& Cod. Vaticanus, sac. r. In the Vatican. The earHest dated MS. of the 

Greek Testament. Contains the whole Gospel. 
U. Cod. Nanianus, saec. x. In the Library of St. Mark's, Venice. Contains 

the whole Gospel. 

Only sue uncials MSS., KBKMS U, afford complete copies of all ism 


The Versions quoted are the following : 
The Latin (Lat). 

The Vetus Latina (Lat Vt^ 

The Vulgate (Vulg.). 
The Egyptian (Aegyptt). 

The Bohairic (BoL), 

The Sahidic (Sah.). 
The Syriac (Syrr.). 

The Curetonian (Cur,X 

The Sinaitic (Sin.). 

The Peshitto (Pesh.). 


The Hardean (HarcL). 

The Palestinian (Hier.). 
The Armenian (Arm.). 
The Ethiopia (Aeth.). 
The Gothic (Goth.), 

We are not yet in a position to determine the relation of the 
recently discovered Sinaitic Syriac (Syr-Sin.) to the other Syriac 
Versions and to other representatives of primitive texts : and it 
would be rash for one who is ignorant of Syriac to attempt a 
solution of this problem. But the readings of Syr-Sin., as given 
in the translation by Mrs. Lewis, are frequently quoted in the 
notes, so that the reader may judge to what extent they support 
the text adopted in this commentary. 

It should be noticed that four of the seven instances of Con- 
flate Readings, cited by WH. (iL pp. 99-104) as proof of the 
comparative lateness of the traditional text, are found in this 
Gospel (ix. 10, xi. 54, xii. 18, xxiv. 23). Mr. Miller, in his new 
edition of Scrivener's Introduction to the Criticism of the N.T. 
(Bell, 1894), denies the cogency of the proof; but the only case 
with which he attempts to deal, and that inadequately (ii. pp. 292, 
293), is Lk. xxiv. 53. See the Classical Review, June 1896, p. 264, 


It is not easy to determine where the literary history of the 
Third Gospel begins. The existence of the oral tradition side by 
side with it during the first century of its existence, and the 
existence of many other documents (L i) previous to it, which 
may have resembled it, or portions of it, very closely, are facts 
which render certainty impossible as to quotations which bear 
considerable resemblance to our Gospel They may come from 
this Gospel; but they may also have another source. Again, 
there are possibilities or probabilities which have to be taken into 
account We do not know how soon Harmonies of two, or three, 
or four Gospels were constructed. The Third Gospel itself is a 
combination of documents ; and there is nothing improbable in 
the supposition that before Tatian constructed his Diatessaron 
others had made combinations of Matthew and Luke, or of all 
three Synoptic Gospels (Sanday, Bampton Lectures, p. 302). 
Some early quotations of the Gospel narrative look as if they 
may have come either from material which the Evangelists used, 
or from a compound of their works, rather than from any one of 
them as they have come down to us. On the other hand the 
difficulty of exact quotation must be remembered. MSS. were 


not abundant, and even those who possessed them found a diffi- 
culty in "verifying their references," when rolls were used and 
not pages, and when neither verses nor even chapters were num- 
bered or divided In quoting from memory similar passages of 
different Gospels would easily become mixed ; all the more so, if 
the writers who quote were in the habit of giving oral instruction 
in the Gospel narrative; for in giving such instruction they would 
be in the habit of constructing a compound text out of the words 
which they chanced to remember from any two or three Gospels. 
What they wanted to convey was the substance of u the Gospel," 
and not the exact wording of the Gospel according to Matthew, or 
Mark, or Luke. 

There is nothing in the Epistle of Barnabas which warrants us 
in believing that the writer knew the Third Gospel : and the co- 
incidence of icoivwijcras ev iraow T<J TrAijcrtov <rov, KOL OVK pcfe 
tSta ctvat (xix. 8) with Acts iv. 32 is too slight to be relied upon. 
Comp. DidaeM iv. 8. Indeed it is not impossible that this 
Epistle was written before our Gospel (A.D. 70-80). In the 
Epistle of Clement, which doubtless is later than the Gospel 
(A.D. 95, 96), we have the perplexing phenomena alluded to 

Mr. v. y f vtL i, i. CUM. ROM. Or.xttLi. LK,\I 36-38. 

00roi <yftp ctrir* &c- 

W cXf^MWflji SfTtf Iwi f\1JvTJTt * CufntTtf 
(PA QttyCvJJ VfUP* US V0i m 

tire, oCrw roirjOfaercu rlpfutif tirrty' jroZ 

i/jfr* tin ft/fare, otfrwi KpLvcre, ical o& ftfy Kptffijrt* 

rpfrcrv, tra ^ tofrfacrai 0/u^* wj xpl- xal p&i icaTaJtAcd^ere, xal 

9* & tp y&P KplfM" WfTCf QVTUt JCptvl/OWvC* 0V fjA) K&T&QlKQffffTJTt* 

TL Kpircre KpB'fpcffQt, &s xpq<rrefa<r0c, otirtn dxoXiWr, ml d-roXv- 

f fi&rptp /*rr/fr x/ > 9 ffTel ^4 ' rrat ^/^* V Q^co-Be* dlSarc, Kal 9o* 

crpciTt, to a^ry ^rercu ^i^ . . . 

6-fperau. [or 

This quotation Is found in the Epistle of Polycarp (il 3) in 

this form : pmi^ovcvovr^ 8e &v etTrev 6 /cuptos SiSaovcov* /A^ icptvcrt 
ti'a jui^ Kpi^T' a^iere, Kal d^cfl^orat ^tv* cXearc, tva eA-oy^rc' 4 
jucrpy /afrpcire, Avri/ierpiy^ijo-erat v/iti/. And Clement of Alexandria 
(Strom, ii 18, p. 476, ed. Potter) has it exactly as Clement of 
Rome, With the exception of dvriju.Tp^^<rcTat for /xerp^^a-erai : 
but he is perhaps quoting his namesake. If not, then the 
probability that fcoth are quoting a source different from any of 
our Gospels becomes much greater (Resch, Agrafha^ pp. 96, 


MT. rviiL 6, 7, xrvL 24. CLBM.ROM. O-.ilviS. LK. xvfl. 1 9 2, dL **, 

<ydp- odd 

r^F fUKp&V TOVT&V, 
TlOTVt>1TU1> tit ftt 9 OT//A- 

a^r^ ^ va KpfJMurtfi $ ^ a r ^ J/ K\CKT&I> IJLOV \vfftre\eT avre} el \l6os 

6vucfa rfpl rpd- ffKavda\t<rcu' Kpeirrov ty ^i/Xi/cof rep^etrcu Tepi 

a^rou jrai Kara- adrj) vepiTeQrjvcu /ttfXoy rdv rpdxri\ov aOroO xai 

jr6oy*4>. * ^ AcXcxr^r /MV Jawr^a*. /uxpwp roi/rwv Iw. 
oiJai 5^ TV dvOp&rt? otoalrf dvdp* 

' M o0 6 i/tos " "' ' 

jca\6v ty ai/ry ef oto 

Here again Clement of Alexandria (Strom, iii. 18, p. <6i) 
quotes exactly as Clement of Rome, with the exception of fwf for 
ov/c after ct, and the omission of T^V before OaXdo-o-av. In Clem. 
Rom. C0r. lix. 3 we have a composite quotation (Is. xiil n ; Ps. 
xxiii. 10 ; Job v. n, etc.), which may possibly have been in- 
fluenced by Lk. i. 52, 53, xiv. u, xviil 14; but nothing can be 
built on this possibility. We must be content to leave it doubtful 
whether Clement of Rome knew our Gospel according to Luke ; 
and the same must be said of Polycaip (see above) and of Ignatius. 
In Eph* xiv. we have favepov rb Sevopov cwrd TOW Kapirw avrov, 
which recalls cic yap rov Kapvov TO &v8pov ytvwcr/crrat (Mt xii. 33) 
and l/caorrov yap SwSpov IK rov IBCov Kapirov ytvcacr/ccrat (Lk, VL 44). 
Smyr. iii. we have the very remarkable passage which perplexed 
Origen, Eusebius, and Jerome as to its source : arc irpos rovt irepl 
Ilerpov ^Xdcv, 1^ avrots* AajSerc, i/^Xa^Varc /te, /cat tScre 5ri OVK 
i/il Sat/xoVtov ao-wfuiTov. This may be a condensation of Lk. 
xxiv. 36-39, or may come from oral tradition or a lost document 
Of other possibilities, TO irvp TO &rj3c<rrov (Eph. xvi.) recalls Mk. 
ix. 43 rather than Lk. iiL 17 : icoXovs fia%ra e'av ^tA.^5, xp l ^o* 
OVK &mv (Pofyc. iL) is not very dose to Lk. vi 32 : iJSovai ro8 
/Siov (^^. viL) is found Lk. viii. 14, but b a common phrase : 
and other slight resemblances (e.g. Magn. x.) may as easily come 
from other Gospels or from tradition. 

We are on surer ground when we come to the DidaM and 
the Gospel of Peter > the dates of which remain to be determined, 
but which may be placed between A.D. 75 and 125. In the former 
we find further evidence of a combination of passages from 
Matthew and Luke, of which we have seen traces in Clement of 
Rome, and which suggests the possibility of a primitive Harmony 
of these two documents. 


MT. atxr, ! DiDAcnrf zrL I* LK. ziL 35* 

*ai al 



5n otoc effort 

dXXA 71?- fywtot dvfyt&rott vowr- 
fyew Ar J o Kvpiot 

Here the acquaintance with our Gospel is highly probable, for 
of the Evangelists Luke alone has the plural of Xvxyos and of 
o<r^v5. In giving the substance of the Sermon on the Mount, the 
Didachi again seems to compound the two Gospels. 

MT. vJL, T. 


LK. vi 

11 jcal&s ^ Aere 3fva roi- 

rotwffiv v/ur 

O0Tblf Kal 

Mo T&V 

ro>)f dyatruvras 

i/iaf . 

rods icarapw- 
v/uuv Kal vpocreti- 

roLelre avrols 

38 c^Xoyctre ro^s xaro- 

T&V 3i(i}K6vT(j>V V/JL&S' 

y&p %d/)(s, &v ayairarc 
robs dyair&vra* 
ofrxl Kal rA 

i/^tas. dXXA 
dyairare ro&t 

irare roi)f [ucrovvrat ijj&t 

ridyova, <rrp4- 
afcf Kal r^\v tfXXqp. 
tf-e dyya/>J<ret 

** r<? Oe\ovrt 

<ai ri Ifi 
/roOwf <re Ws, J 
6f\ovra di 



Tit ffoi 8$ fiavtfffM cb 
<rtaybva t <rrp&//' 
Kal rty dXX^M, Kal 
r&etos* &v ayya- 
ft TU [il\Lov IF, 
' afrroO 5i5o* ^Ar 
rw rA Ifjukribv <rov, 
atfry jcoU 

s, ro/a 
; /ca2 7A/> 
ol A/w/wwXoi TOI>S dTa- 
rw^ras or>ro^s dyavQw. 
85 n-XV d7arare roiir 
tyBpobs $ 
&mu 6 




drafref oWJ 
rarri r< 

jcai diro rov atpovr6$ crov 
rA Ifjtdnoy xal TOP x 17 "^* 


cr JWou, xal 
A <rA 

Expressions which are peculiar to each form of the Sermon 
are here so abundant that we conclude that this doctrine of the 
Two Ways has been influenced by both forms. But the order in 
which the several precepts are put together is so different from 
both Gospels, that the editor can scarcely have had either Gospel 
before him. Very possibly the order and wording have been 
disturbed by oral instruction in Christian morality given to cate- 
chumens (Sanday, Bamptons^ p. 302). But the evidence of 


acquaintance with the Third Gospel is strong ; and it is somewhat 
strengthened by the fact that in the Didache Christ is called the 
" Servant (TTCLLS) of God " (ix. 2, 3, x. 2, 3), a use of mus which in 
N.T. is almost confined to Luke (Acts iii. 13, 26, iv. 27, 30; 
comp. iv. 23 ; Lk. i. 54, 69). But this use is common in LXX, 
and may easily be derived from Isaiah or the Psalms rather than 
from the Acts. Nevertheless there is other evidence of the in- 
fluence of the Acts on the DidaM^ and scarcely any evidence of 
the influence of Isaiah or of the Psalms : indeed the references to 
the O.T. are remarkably few. And this not only makes it quite 
possible that the use of 6 wofe <rou comes from the Acts, but also 
still further strengthens the conviction that the Didache is in- 
debted to the writings of S. Luke. Comp. crvyKoivo^o-eis Se 
Trdvra ro> aSeA.<<3 crow Kal OVK Ipeis tSta ctvai (Did. iv. 8) with ou<$ 
ets TI Toiv wapxovTcov avrip eAeycv iSiov ctvai, dXX* yv avrots iravra 
Koiva (Acts iv. 32). Bryennios and Wunsche see traces of Lk. 
ix. 1-6 and x. 4-21 in Did. xi. ; but this chapter might easily have 
stood as it does if Luke had never written. Yet there is enough 
in what has been quoted above to establish the fact of the influence 
of Luke on the Didache. 

It is generally admitted that the fragment of the Gospel of 
Peter suffices to show that the writer of that apocryphal narrative 
was acquainted with all four of the Canonical Gospels. But it 
will be worth while to quote some of the expressions and state- 
ments which have a marked resemblance to Luke in particular. 

GOSPEL or PETER. LK, xxiii*, xxiv, 

4. IleiXoTot rtful/at rp&t 'Hpctoq?. 7. HeiXaTot . . 


5. xal ffdpfarar tvuptiffKci. 54. 

XO. fycyKOv 5uo Kaxovpyov*. 32. ^yovro &l jcal Irepot Ka,Kwpyoi 

13. els $4 f TWF KaKotipytar fKctvuw 39. et> U rQv 

&Vl8t<rev aj/rou'y, X^ywV ^ftis Sib rk ytav ^SXcur^/Aei aMv. . . . 

41. d^ta ybp &v frrpda/jLcv diroXa/i- 
ftdvo/W oDroy 5^ obtih &TOTTOV brpaev. 


6 ijXtos ttiv. 45. roO JjKlov iK\clTorros. 

6 Xadj fixat Yoyyu^w xal 6r* 48. Tdrret ol wjnrcLpayevfifuin* tf%Xw 

TtTCLl Ttt ffTTjvlJf TUVTOVTff TCL (TT^vJft 

34. r^ftif ^ irufHtHTKorros roO <r^9- 54. a2 ffdpparw tortyufftcr. 

36. 5i/o 4?fyaf Kar\d6yras iKeWer 4. ^9pet ftfo 4r6mj<rav atrcus fr 

wo\b ^7705 ^ovras. lo-^i AffrpoarrofoQ. 

5a fyfyov 5^ r^r icvpiarft . . . M 1. T Si fu$ r&v 

r( /wlfcum. /Jo^wf Art rA /u^A*a 

54. A fopofjw e/t prr)fio<rvi>Tir afooQ. A frrotfutffeur d/xfywiTcu 

These resemblances, which are too close and too numerous to 
be accidental, are further emphasized when the parallel narratives 


are compared. S. Luke alone mentions the sending to Herod. 
He alone uses the expression a-apfiarov e7re<u>o-fcv (contrast ML 
xxviii i). He alone calls the two robbers Ka/co9pyoi. He alone 
tells us that one of the robbers reviled, and that one contrasted 
the justice of their fate with the innocence of Jesus. He alone 
mentions the sun in connexion with the darkness. He alone 
speaks of all the multitudes of spectators, and of their beating 
their breasts. He alone calls the two Angels at the tomb avSpcs 
(Mt. and Mk. mention only one), and calls the tomb /i^/xa ; and 
he alone uses fopctv of the women bringing the spices. There are 
other passages in which the Gospel of Peter resembles Luke with 
one or more of the other Gospels ; but what has been quoted 
above is sufficient to show that the writer of the apocryphal gospel 
was influenced by S. Luke's narrative. It must be remembered 
that these ten coincidences are found within the compass of fifty- 
five verses, and that they are not exhaustive. The inscription on 
the cross, oSros corny 6 /Sao-iXois TOV 'LrpaiJA. (n), is closer to that 
given by S. Luke, o 1 p. ran/ louSatW ovros (xxiii. 38), than to any 
of the other forms ; and perhaps the words of the robber, <rom)/> 
yvo/ivo? (see above, 13), are suggested by o-coo-oi/ o-tavrov icat ij/ias 
(xxiii. 39). The use of /tco^ftpux for "midday" (15) is found 
in N.T. nowhere but Acts xxii. 6. The cry of the Jews after 
Christ's death, SSere on TTOO-OV Si/caios ccmv (28), looks like an 
adaptation of the centurion's confession, oWus 6 avOpwros ovros 
Studios %v (xxiii 47) ; and perhaps efyyijcravTo ira.vra owreo cISov (45) 
is an echo of C&TVOWTO ra cv rfj 68$ (xxiv. 35). And, as already 
pointed out ( i), Pseudo-Peter always speaks of Jesus Christ 
as 6 icvpios, a use which begins to be common in the Third 

The evidence of another interesting document of about the 
same date is worth quoting. The Testaments of the XII. Patri- 
archs is a Jewish Christian writing which almost certainly was 
composed between the two destructions of Jerusalem, A.D. 70 and 
135. It shows marked traces of a knowledge of the Synoptic 
traditions and of S. Luke's Gospel in particular. Some of the 
coincidences given below are probably the result of independent 
citation of the O.T. But the citation may have been suggested 
to the later writer by acquaintance with it in the Gospel narrative. 


euben L), otvor xal vUcpa. od & rig (L 15 j 

Num. vi. 3). 
lyrwr 8n ftxafot vdtrx** (Sim. iv.). *rai ^ecs ftiv ftjcafa* (xxilL 41)* 

cfipto-Korrct xdpiv twdruv 'lyo-ovs rpodcoirrer . . . xdprrt TO/4 
v.). 6^ K al &ep6ro (tu 52; I Sam. 





a&rotfj (Sim. vi.). 


o2 otfpai'oJ (Levi iL, 
roO jttAXwrof XvrpovffOat r&v 

oLL Ktfpioj rdvra 
^wj u2o0 
atib'Of (Levi iv.). 
tfvrenjpow TOI)S 
KupStq, pov (Levi vi.). 

Ixiv. I). 

adroit (xv. 2) comp. < 
Kal evrtirtofuy afrrtf (Acti 

rbw otipwtw (iii. 21 ; Is. 


fr TV icapSta HQV, 
KG! otfic dpTJyyetXa ourA ravri dy- 
Qpdnry (Levi viiL). 
fcfrafttf 'T^rrov (Levi xvi). 
hrtorevcr &r* atfrodf rpo/^j (Judah 

TOieiV rdn-ct rd Sucaubfjara TLvptov <col 

eou (Judah xiiL). 
^r f ai/r^ ot otpavot, 
e&Xoytav Harp&t aylov 
(Judah xxir,). 

ol ^v Tr/^xe^t 9cd irt//Mo 
6ij<rovra<., Kal ot 6* vert^i 
fforrtu, Kal ol fr dffOercLg, 
(Judah xxv.). 

Arwrp^et /ca/^iaf fcrtilcct 
E^ptor (Ban T.). 

jj}&t dyaroX^ 

'lo-paifX (xxiv. 21). 

(L 78). 

jtrwerfpct, ri ^f/tara ravrct . . . if 
r$ Kaffitq. aMjs (ii. 19 ; comp. iL 51). 

Kal a&rol falyipw Kal otidcvl atrtjy- 


(ix, 36). 

et^aAUf *Wi<rrov (L 35). 
<f>6pot tortvwev tor aMr (L 
comp. Acts xix. 17). 

n-o/xtfopero fr rdouit rail 
jfal Ji/ccu^/wwty roO Kvpiov (L 6). 
avctfx.Qfy 04 T to otpavbv Kal jrara 
fyu rd weQfM r& fyw (ii. 21, 22). 


, el rrtoxpl, 

4 ^<urcXc(a roO OeoO. fMicdptM oL ret 
rwrrej rw, $n xo/xrcur^o-o^rou (vi. 
20, 21 ; Mt v. 3-6). 

4rt0rpty<u KapSlat rartpw M 
rteva* Kal dvciOcit if ip 
(I 17 ; MaL iv. 5). 

(xviL 3). 

(Asher mi rtrur (vii 34 } Mt zl' 19). 


ical ai/r6r 

Kal rlvwr furb. rQv 
viL). See above, Sim. vi. 

Besides these verbal coincidences there are many coincidences 
in thought, especially respecting the admission of the Gentiles to 
the Kingdom through the Messiah, who is the Saviour of all, Jew 
and Gentile alike. " The Lord shall raise up from Levi a Priest, 
and from Judah a King, God and man. He shall save all the 
nations and the race of Israel " (Simeon viL). M A King shall rise 
from Judah and shall make a new priesthood . , . unto all the 
nations (Levi yiiL). Comp. Judah xxiv. ; Zebulon ix. ; Dan. vi ; 
Naphtali iv., viiL ; Asher viL ; Benjamin ix Moreover, there are 
passages which are very similar in meaning, although not in word- 
ing, to passages in Luke : comp. the end of Joseph xyiL with 
Lk. xvii. 27, and the beginning of Joseph xviiL with Lk. vL 28. 

It is hardly necessary to trace the history of the Third Gospel 
in detail any further. It has been shown already (pp. xv-xvii) 
that Justin Martyr, Tatian, Celsus, the writer of the Clementine 
Homilies, Basilides, Valentinus, Marcion, and the Churches of 
Lyons and Vienne, knew the Third Gospel, and that Irenapus, the 


Muratorian Canon, Tertullian, Qement of Alexandria, and others 
definitely assign it to S. Luke^ In the second half of the second 
century this Gospel is recognized as authentic and authoritative ; 
and it is impossible to show that it had not been thus recognized 
at a very much earlier date. 

The order of the Gospels has not always been the same. But, 
just as in the interpretation of the four symbolical creatures, the 
calf has uniformly been taken as indicating S. Luke, so in the 
arrangement of the Gospels his has almost invariably been placed 
third. The order with which we are familiar is the common order 
in most MSS. and Versions: but in D 594, abcdefjf^iqr and 
the Gothic Version, and in the Apostolic Constitutions, what is called 
the Western order (Matthew, John, Luke, Mark) prevails. The 
obvious reason for it is to have the two Apostles together and before 
the other two Evangelists. In a few authorities other arrangements 
are found. X and the Latin k have John, Luke, Mark, Matthew, 
while 90 has John, Luke, Matthew, Mark, and 399 John, Luke, 
Matthew. The Curetonian Syriac has Matthew, Mark, John, Luke. 


A good and full list of commentaries on the Gospels is given 
by Dr. W, P. Dickson in the English translation of Meyer's Com- 
mentary on S. Matthew, i. pp. xxiii-xliii and of commentaries on 
S. Mark and S. Luke in that of Meyer's Commentary on S. Mark 
*nd S. Luke, i. pp. xiii-xvi. It will suffice to name a few of the 
chief works mentioned by him, especially those which have been 
in constant use during the writing of this commentary, and to add 
A few others which have appeared since Dr. Dickson published 
his lists (1877, 1880), or for other reasons were omitted by him. 1 
Of necessity the selection here given in many cases corresponds 
with that in the volume on Romans by Dr. Sanday and Mr. 
Headlam; and the reader is referred to that (pp. xcix-cix) for 
excellent remarks on the characteristics of the different com- 
mentaries, which need not be repeated here. 


ORIGEN (Orig.) ; t 253- Homilia in Lucam in Ongenis Off. 
ed Delarue, iii. 932; Lommatzsch, v. 85; Migne, xiii. 1801, 
1902. These thirty-nine short Homilies are an early work, and 
have been preserved in the Latin translation made by Jerome, A 
few fragments of the original Greek survive in the Philocalia (ed, 

1 See also Introduction to the Synoptic Gospels by Dr. P. J. Gloag, T. & T 
Clark, 1895, and the literature quoted p. 200. 


J. A. Robinson, Camb. 1893) and elsewhere. The genuineness of 
these Homilies has been disputed, but is not doubtful A sum- 
mary of the contents of each is given in Westcott*s article 
PRIGENES, D. Chr. Biog. iv. 113. The first twenty are on Lk. 
L, ii., and the next twelve on Lk. iii., iv., leaving the main portion 
of the Gospel almost untouched. Besides these there are frag- 
ments of notes in the original Greek, which have been preserved 
in Venice MS. (28, 394); Migne, xviil 311-370. They extend 
over chapters i.-xx. 

EUSEBIUS of Csesarea (Eus.); t before 341. Efe rJ ari 
Aov/cav $ayyeXiov in Migne, xxiv. 529. Only fragments remain: 
on Lk. L 5, 18, 19, 32, 35, 38, ii. 32, iv. 18, vi 18, 20, viL 29, 30, 
viii. 31, 43* ix- i, 3, 4, 7, 26, 28, 34, x. 6, 8, xi. ai, xii. n, 22, 34, 
36, 37, 42, 45, xiii. 20, 35, xiv. 18, xvii. 3, 23, 25-31, 34, 37, 
xviii. 2, xix. 12, 13, 17, xx. 2, 3, xxi. 25, 26, 28-32, 36, xxfi. 30, 57, 
xxiv. 4. 

CYRIL of Alexandria (Cyr. Alex.) ; t 444- *&&rrn<ns cfe T* 
<cara Aou/caV evayy&iov in Migne, Ixxii. 475* Only portions of the 
original Greek are extant, but a Syriac version of the whole has 
been edited by Dr. R. Payne Smith, who has also translated this 
version into English (Oxford, 1859). The Syriac version shows 
that many Greek fragments previously regarded as part of the com- 
mentary are from other writings of Cyril, or even from other writ- 
ings which are not his. The Greek fragments which coincide with 
the Syriac prove that the latter is a faithful translation. The com- 
mentary is homiletic in form. 

THEOPHYLACT (TheopL), archbishop of Bulgaria (1071-1078); 
t after 1118. Migne, cxxiii. 

EUTHYMIUS ZIGABENUS (Euthym.) ; falter xn8. Migne, 
cxxix. 853. 

These two almost contemporaneous commentaries are among 
the best of their kind. They draw much from earlier writers, but 
do not follow slavishly, and are far superior to mediaeval Latin 
commentaries. The terseness of Euthymius is not unlike that of 


AMBROSE (Ambr.); t397* Expositio Evang. see. L*cam\ 
Migne, xv. 1525. ' Ambrose follows Philo and Origen in seeking 
for spiritual or mystical meanings under the natural or historical 
sense, and these are sometimes very far-fetched : in vtrbis ludit^ in 
untentiis dormitat (Jerome, ProL in Horn. Orig. in Luc.). 

EUCHERIUS; t449 or 450. Liber instructionum in Lac* 
Evang. ; Migne, L 799. 

ARNOBIUS JUNIOR ; t after 460. Annotation** ad qumdam 
Evangcliorum faa ; Migne, liii 570, 578. 


PATERIUS of Brescia ; friend of Gregory the Great He col- 
lected from the writings of Gregory an Expositio Vet et Nov. 
Test., of which Book III. is a catena of Passages on S. Luke ; 
Migne, Ixxix. 1057. In the eleventh century the monk ALULF 
made a similar collection; Migne, Ixxix. 1199. 

None of these works are very helpful as regards exegesis 
Euchenus and Arnobius do not repay perusal. The extracts from 
Gregory are mainly from the Moralia or commentary on Job, full 
of allegorical interpretation. 

BEDE, the Venerable; t735- /* Lucam Exp. Libri VI. ; 
Migne, xcii. 307; Giles, xi., xii.; ed. Colon. 1612, v. 217. The 
character of the work may be given in his own words: "I have 
made it my business, for the use of me and mine, briefly to com- 
pile out of works of the venerable Fathers, and to interpret accord* 
ing to their meaning (adding somewhat of my own) these 
following pieces " and he gives a list of his writings (JET. E. sub 
fin. See also the ProL in Marc.). This commentary is far 
superior to those just mentioned, and is an oasis in a desert 

SEDUUUS SCOTUS ; t c. 830. A mere compiler, often from 
Origen; Migne, ciii. 27. WALAFRID STRABUS of Reichenau; 
1 849. Glossa ordinaria^ a compilation with some original matter ; 
Migne, cxiv. 243, 893. It became very famous. We may pass 
over with bare mention CHRISTIANUS DRUTHMARUS; c. 850; 
Migne, cvi. 1503 : BRUNO ASTENSIS; c. 1125; Migne, cbcv. 33: 
and PETRUS COMESTOR; c. 1180; Migne, cxcviii. 1537. 

THOMAS AQUINAS, Doctor Angelicus; 1*1274. Expositio 
continua or Catena aurea in Evangelia^ a mosaic of quotations (to 
be accepted with caution) from over eighty Christian writers, from 
Ignatius to Euthymius, so arranged as to form a summary of 
patristic theological teaching. Opp. ed. Venet. iv. 5 ; translated 
Oxford, 1845* 

ALBERTUS MAGNUS of Ratisbon ; 1 1280, 


ERASMUS, Desiderius; fi536. Adnotationes in JV.T. 9 1516; 
Paraphrases, 1522. 

BUTZER or BUCER, Martin; fiSS 1 - /* &*&* quatuor Evan- 
gelia EnarrationeS) 1551. 

CALVIN, John ; 1 1564. In harmoniam ex Matt. Man. et Luc, 
compositam Commentarii, 1553; Brunsvigse, 1868; translated by 
the Calvin Trans. Society, 1842 ; strong and independent 

BEZA, Theodore; 1*1605. Adnotationes in JV.T. t 1565, 

GROTIUS (Huig van Groot); 11645. Adnotationes in N.T. % 
1644. Arminian ; an early dtterapt to apply philological principles 

$ 10.) COMMENTARIES hxxiii 

(learned from J. J. Scaliger) and classical illustrations to the Bible ; 
still useful 

HAMMOND, Henry ; 1 1660. Canon of Christ Church, Oxford ; 
" the Father of English Commentators." Paraphrase and Annota- 
tions of the N.T^ 1653, 1845; "reveals genuine exegetical tact 
and learning." Biblical paraphrase is of English origin. 

One or two Roman Catholic commentators in this period 
require mention. 

CAJETAN, Cardinal (Jacob de VIo) ; t J534 ; a Dominican. In 
quatuor Evang. etActa Afost. Commentarii^ 1543. Under pressure 
from Luther (1518) he became considerably emancipated from 
patristic and scholastic influence. 

MALDONATUS, Joannes (Maldon.); 11583; a Spanish Jesuit 
Commentarii in quatuor Evangelia 1596; ed. Sansen, 1840; ed. 
EL Martin (condensed) 1850. Admirable of its kind : he rarely 
shirks a difficulty, and is often sagacious in his exposition. An 
English translation by G. J. Davie is being published by 

CORNELIUS A LAPIDE (van Stein); 11637; a Jesuit Comm. 
in quatuor Evang., 1638. Part of a commentary on almost the 
whole Bible. A voluminous compilation, including much allegory 
and legend; devout and often edifying, but sometimes puerile. 
English translation of the Comm. on S. Luke, Hodges, 1887. 

ESCOBAR Y MENDOSA, Antonio; 1*1669; a Spanish Jesuit, 
whose casuistry was gibbeted by Pascal In Evangdia sanctorum 
et temporis commentarii^ 1637. 

Two great names in the eighteenth century serve well as a 
transition from the writers of the two preceding centuries to the 
present age. 

BENGEL, Johann Albrecht (Beng.); fi75^ Gnomon N*T t> 
1742. A masterpiece, rivalling Euthymius Zigabenus in terseness, 
and excelling him in originality and insight. English translation, 
Clark, 1857. 

WETSTEIN, Johann Jacob (Wetst); ti754 Nw. Test. 
Gn&cum, 1751, 1752. A monument of criticism and learning. 
Wetstein was a leader in the field of textual criticism, and the 
stores of learning collected in his notes have been of the greatest 
service to all subsequent students of N.T. 


SCHLEIERMACHER, Fried. Dan. Ernst; 11834; Ueber die 
Sihriften des Lukas, 1817. Translated anonymously by Thirlwall, 

BORNEMANN, Fried. August ; 1 1850. Scholia in Luc* Evan- 


DE WETTE, Wilh. Mart L.; 11849. Xurze Erklarung der 
Evangelien des Lukas und Markus, 1839. Free, precise, and 

MEYER, Hein. Aug. Wilh.; 11873. Kritisch exegetischer 
Kommentar uber das N.T. Markus und Lukas, 1846. Excellent 
A good English translation of the fifth edition was published by 
T. &T. Clark, 1880. Grammar is sometimes ridden to death; 
but this is still one of the best commentaries for English readers. 
The German revisions of Meyer by Bernhard Weiss, 1885, etc., 
are superior, especially as regards the text. 

OOSTERZEE, Jan Jacob van; t*882. In Lange's Theologische- 
homiletisches Bibelwerk, 1857-1876, he commented on S. Luke. 
English translation published by T. & T, Clark, 1864, The notes 
are in three sections throughout ; critical, doctrinal, and homiletic. 
HAHN, G. L., Professor of Theology at Breslau. Das Evan- 
gelium des Lukas, 1892, 1894. Two substantial volumes, full of 
useful material, but grievously perverse in questions of textual 

SCHANZ, Paul Das Evangelium des heiligen Lucas, 1883. 
Probably much the best Roman Catholic commentary. 

LASSERRE, Henri. Les Saints vangiles, 1886, 1887. A 
French translation of the Gospels with brief notes. Uncritical, but 
interesting. It received the imprimatur of the Archbishop of 
Paris and the praise of Leo xiu., ran through twenty-five editions 
in two years, and then through the influence of the Jesuits was 

GODET, Frederic, Professor at NeuchateL Commentaire sur 
t&vangile de S. Luc, 1871, 1872, 1888. Equal to Meyer in 
exegesis, but weak in textual criticism. The edition of 1888 is 
greatly to be preferred An English translation of the second 
edition was published by T. & T. Clark, 1879. 

ALFORD, Henry; 11871. Greek Testament^ voL L 1849, 5& 
ed. 1863. Sensible and clear. 

WORDSWORTH, Christopher, Bishop of Lincoln; 11885. 
Greek Testament, vpL i. 1856, sth ed. 1866. Scholarly and devout, 
supplying the patristic element wanting in Alford, but otherwise 
inferior; weak in textual criticism. 

MCCLELLAN, John Brown. The New Testament, a new trans- 
lation, from a revised text, with analyses, copious references and 
illustrations, chronological and analytical harmony, notes and dis- 
sertations, voL i 1875; unfortunately the only one published. 
Contains some grotesque renderings and perverse arguments, with 
a great deal of valuable matter. 

PLUMPTRE, Edward Hayes ; 1 1891. The Synoptic Gospels in 
Bishop Ellicotfs Commentary for English Readers, Cassell, 1878. 
Popular and suggestive, with a tendency to excessive ingenuity. 


JONES, William Basil, Bishop of St David's, and COOK, 
Frederic Charles, Canon of Exeter; St Luke in the Speaker's 
Commentary^ 1878. Inadequate. 

CARR, Arthur, Notes on the Greek Testament^ St. Luke, 1875. 
A scholarly handbook. 

FARRAR, Fred. William, Dean of Canterbury. St Luke in the 
Cambridge Greek Testament, 1884 and later. More full, but less 
precise, than Carr. 

SADLER, Michael Ferrebee : ti^QS- Gospel ace. to St. Luke^ 
1886. Dogmatic and practical rather than critical: somewhat 
capricious in textual criticism. 

BOND, John. WH. text of St Luke with introduction and 
notes, 1890. Brief to a fault, but useful. 

CAMPBELL, Colin. Critical Studies in St. Lukts Gospel, 1890. 
Fails to establish a special demonology and Ebionite tendency, 
but contains many useful remarks. 

BERNARD, Thomas Dehany. The Songs of the Hofy Nativity, 
1895. Did not come to the knowledge of the present writer until 
the commentary on chapters i. and ii. was in print 1 

Index II. contains the names of many other writers whose 
works are of great use to the student of this Gospel. 

1 A similar fact canoed the omission at p. xxiz of some recent discussions of 
the Synoptic problem : c.g* The Abb Loisy, Essays in VEnseignement 
Biblique, 1892, Revue des Religions, 1894, and Revue BiWique, 1896 (see the 
Guardian, August 1896, p. 1317); W. Arnold Stevens and E. De Wtt Burton, 
A Sarmmy oftk* Gi&bjr Historic* Study >, Bottoo, i*9& 


Ambr. . 


Aug. . 


Bas. . 


Chrys. . 


Clem. Alex. 

Clement of Alexandria. 

Clem. Horn. 

Clementine Homilies. 

Clem. Recogn. 

Clementine Recognition* 

Clem. Rom. 

Clement of Rome. 

Cypr. . 


Cyr. Alex. 

Cyril of Alexandria, t 

Cyr. Hier. 

Cyril of Jerusalem. 

Dion. Alex. 

Dionysius of Alexandria. 

Epiph. . 


Bus. . 


Greg. Nai. 

Euthymius Zigabenui. 
Gregory of Nazianzum, 

Greg. Nys. 

Gregory of Nyssa. 

Herm. . 




Ign. . 


Iren. . 



Latin Version of Irexuw 

Jer. (Hieroo.) 





Justin Martyr. 




Latin Version of Drip* 

Tert. , 












Vetus Latins. 









Rheims (or Douay) 



Authorized Version. 

Revised Version. 

Textus Receptus* 



Westcott and Hort. 



De Wette. 






Wordsworth (Chr.). 


Burton . 

C. L G. 

Didon,/. C. 

Burton, N.T. Moods and 

Corpus Inscriptionum Gr 


Fire Didor^/Ssus Cknst. 
Itbcn fesus. 


Lft. Epp. . . . J. B. Lightfoot, 1 Notes on 

Epistles of S. Paul. 

Wsctt. . . * Westcott 

Edersh, Z. <fr* T. , . Edersheim, Life and Times 

of Jesus the Messiah. 
History of the Jewish Nation. 
Robinson, Researches in 

Scb.uiex 9 jwisA People in the 

Times of Jesus Christ. 
Scrivener, Introduction to 
the Criticism of the New 

Stanley, Sinai and Palestine 
Trench, Miracles. 
New Testament Syn- 
Tristram, Natural History 

of the Bible. 

Smith's Dictionary of the 
Bibk) ist or and edition. 
Smith's Dictionary of Chris- 
tian Antiquities. 
Kraus, Rtal-Enc. d. Chr. A&. Kraus, Real - Encykbf&di* 

dtr Christlichen Alter- 

Herzog's Protestantische 
Rtal-Encyklopddit, itt or 
and edition. 
Cremer, Lexicon of New 

Testament Greek. 
L. & S. Lex. . . Liddle and Scott, Lexicon. 

Greg. Prok&. . , Gregory, Prolegomena ad 

Tischtndorfti ed. N.T. 

Hist. off. N. . 
Rob. Res. in Pal. 

Schurer,/ P. in T. off. C. 

Scriv. Int. 

Stanley, Sin. * Pal. . 
Trench, Mir. . . 

Par. . 

Syn. . 

Tristram, Nat. Hist. ofB. 

D. Chr. Ant. . 

Herzog, /-.* or 

Crem. Lex. 




Winer, Grammar of N.T. 
Greek (the page refers to 
Moulton's edition). 



N.B.-The text commented upon la that of Weatoott and Hort. Tha 
very few Instanoea In whloh the editor Is Inclined to dissent from thl 
text are noted as they occur. 

< The name of John Lightfoot ii not abbreviated In this votnm. 




THE title cannot be any part of the original autograph. It is 
found in different forms in ancient authorities, the earliest being 
the simplest : KCLT& AouKay (tf B F), evayy&iov KO.TO, Aowcav (A C 
D S), TO Kara Aou/cav evayy&iov or TO Kara Aov/cav aytov cvayyeXtof 

The icar neither affirms nor denies authorship : it implies conformity to a 
type. But, inasmuch as all four Gospels have the icard, these uniform titles 
must be interpreted according to the belief of those who gave the titles, viz. the 
Christians of the first four centuries ; and it was their belief that each Evangelist 
composed the Gospel which bears his name. Had the *ard meant no more 
than "drawn up according to the teaching of," then this Gospel would have 
been called Kara IlaOXov, and the second Gospel would have been called Korfc 
IIr/>ov; for it was the general tradition that Mark wrote according to the 
teaching of Peter, and Luke (in a different sense) according to the teaching of 
Paul. The xard, however, is not a mere substitute for the genitive of author- 
ship, but indicates that the same subject has been treated by others. Thus, 
^ raXotd SiaB'/jicq Kara, roi>s (38ofjrfJKovra points to the existence of other transla- 
tions, just as "0/-M7/JOS /card, 'A.picrrapKOj> or Kara 'Apurro<f>dj'i)i' points to the 
existence of other editions. That the /card does not exclude authorship is 
shown by such expressions as 4 irori Mww& vcvrdrevxps (Epiphamus) and 
^ Ka6' 'H.p68oTov loTQpla (Diodorus) ; comp. to TOW ^iro^^/uirw/AOw rots /carA 
rov Neqafav (2 Mac. li. 13). Strictly speaking, there is only one Gospel, 
ciJayy^Xtov 0eoO, the Gospel of God concerning His Son (Rom. i. i) ; but it 
has been given to us in four shapes, etfayy?XtoF rerpAfMp^ov (Iren. H&r. 
Ji. n. 8), and the icard indicates the shape in which the writer named 
composed it 


The classical style of this opening, and its similarity to the 
prefaces of Herodotus, Thucydides, and Polybius, hardly amount 
to proof that Lk. was well read in classical literature, and con- 
sciously imitated Greek historians ; but there is nothing improbable 
in this supposition. Among the words which are classical rather 


than biblical should be noticed lirciS^Trep, eVixpti/, dvaTa<roecr0oi, 
81177770-15, /ca0e)}$. The construction also is classical, and in no 
way Hebraistic. We have clauses idiomatically interlaced, not 
simply co-ordinated. The modest position claimed by the writer 
is evidence of his honesty. A forger would have claimed to be an 
eye-witness, and would have made no apology for writing. Ewald 
remarks that " in its utter simplicity, modesty, and brevity, it is 
the model of a preface to an historical work." Its grammatical 
construction should be compared with that of the preface to the 
synodical epistle in Acts xv. 24, 25 : *Eiri^ ij*oiwra/iv . , 

This prologue contains all that we really know respecting the 
composition of early narratives of the life of Christ, and it is the 
test by which theories as to the origin of our Gospels must be 
judged. No hypothesis is likely to be right which does not 
harmonize with what is told us here. Moreover, it shows that an 
inspired writer felt that he was bound to use research and care in 
order to secure accuracy. 

1. 'Eirei8i]Trp. A stately compound, suitable for a solemn 
opening : freq. in class. Grk., but not found in LXX, or elsewhere 
m N.T. Quoniam quidem, " For as much as," Weil denn einmaL 

iroXXoi. The context seems to imply that these, like Lk,, were 
not eye-witnesses. That at once would exclude Mt., whose Gospel 
Lk. does not appear to have known. It is doubtful whether Mk. 
is included in the iroXXou The writers of extant apocryphal 
gospels cannot be meant, for these are all of later origin. Probably 
all the documents here alluded to were driven out of existence by 
the manifest superiority of the four Canonical Gospels. The 
Imxcipijcrap cannot imply censure, as some of the Fathers thought, 
for Lk. brackets himself with these writers (28o ica^ot); what 
they attempted he may attempt The word occurs 2 Mac. ii. 29, 
vii. 19 ; Acts ix. 29, xix. 13 ; and is freq. in class. Grk. in the sense 
of "put the hand to, take in hand, attempt" The notion of 
unlawful or unsuccessful attempting is sometimes implied by the 
context : it is not contained in the word. Luther renders unttr- 
wunden hdben^ "have ventured. 1 * Lk. must have regarded these 
attempts as insufficient^ or he would not have added another. 
Meyer quotes Ulpian, p. 159 (in Valckenaer), lirei&yirtp -n-cpl rovrov 
emxetpyarav airoX&yijo-ao-Qat. It is doubtful whether 
. necessarily implies a great undertaking. 

&KaT<fa(r0ai iriyr\<Tw. "To draw up again in order a narra- 
tive"; ?>. to arrange afresh so as to show the sequence of events. 
The verb is a rare one, and occurs elsewhere only Plut Moral 
p. 969 C, De sollert. animxl. xii. (Reiske, x. p. 36), in the sense ol 
"practise, go over again in order," Iren. in. 21. 2, and as #./, 
Eccles, ii. 20. The subst implies something more than mere 


notes or anecdotes; "a leading through to the end" (durch- 
fuhreri), "a narrative" (Ecclus. vi. 35, ix. 15 ; 2 Mac. ii. 32, vi. 
17; Plat. Sep. 392 D; Anst. Rhet. 111. 16. i). 

Versions vary greatly: or dinar e narrationem (Latt.), componere narra- 
tionem (Beza), stellen die Rede (Luth.), "ordeyne the telling" (Wic.), 
"compyle a treates" (Tyn.), "set forth the words" (Cov.), " set forth the 
declaracion" (Cran.), "write the histone" (Gen.), "compile a narration" 
(Rhem.), "set forth in order a declaration" (AV.), "draw up a narrative" 
(RV.), composer une narration suime (Godet), coordonntr en corps derecit 
(Lasserre), " Restore from memory a narrative" (Blass). 

TWV irirXTjpo<|>opi]|ji^vwv. " Of the things which have been car- 
ried through to the end, of the matters which have been accom- 
plished, fully established." Here again English Versions differ 
much; but "surely known" (Tyn.), "surely to be believed" 
(Cran.), "surely believed" (AV.), cannot be justified. The verb 
when used of persons may mean " persuade fully, convince," and 
in pass, "be fully persuaded" (Rom. iv. 21, xiv. 5); but of things 
it means "fulfil" (2 Tim. iv. 5, 17). Here we may render 
"accomplished." Others less well render "fully proved." See 
Lightfoot on CoL iv. 12. The iv ^lv probably means "among us 
Christians." Christendom is the sphere in which these facts have 
had their full accomplishment The i?/uv in ver. 2 shows that con- 
temporaries are not meant If these things were handed down to 
Lk., then he was not contemporary with them. The verse is 
evidence that the accomplished facts were already rally established 
and widely known, for they had already been narrated by many. 
See Westcott, Intr. to Gosp. p. 190, yth ed 

2. icafl&s irop&ocraK f\plv. " Even as they delivered them to us.* 
The difference between os, "as," and Ka0o>$, "just as," should be 
marked in translation : the correspondence was exact Lk. im- 
plies that he himself was among those who received the tradition. 
Like the iroAAol, he can only arrange afresh what has been handed 
down, working at second hand, not as an eye-witness. He gives 
no hint as to whether the facts were handed down orally or in 
writing. The difference between the voXXot and these avroVrac is 
not tint the voXXot wrote their narratives while the avroVnu did 
not, but that the avrdVroi were primary authorities, which the 
iroXXot were not 

dmrjp&ai ywoplvoi rou Xoyou. They not only had personal know- 
ledge of the facts (a&roVrai), they also had practical experience of 
the effects. They had preached and taught, and had thus learned 
what elements in the Gospel were of most efficacy for the winning 
and saving of souls. That rov Xoyov belongs to vmjpercu only, not 
to cUrroTTTai, and means "the doctrine," i.e. the Gospel (Acts vi 4, 
viii 4, xiv. 25, xvL 6, xviL n), is manifest from the context 
Origen and Athanasius are wrong in making rov Xoyov mean the 


personal Word, the Son of God, a use which is peculiar to Jn. 
The air dpxJjs refers to the beginning of Christ's ministry (Jn. xv. 
27, xvi. 4). For frmrjp^njs see on iv. 20 and comp Acts xm. 5. 

3. eSoe icdfjLoi. This is the main sentence, the apodosis of 
7TL$yTp iroXXol irXipi]cr<Lv. It neither implies nor excludes 
inspiration : the !So * may or may not have been inspired. The 
wish to include inspiration caused the addition in some Latin 
MSS. of et spiritui sancto (Acts xv. 28), which makes what follows 
to be incongruous. With eSoe comp. the Muratorian Fragment : 
Lucas iste medicus . . . nomine suo ex opinwne conscnp$it~~ 
Dominum tamen nee ipse vidit in carne et idem, prout assequi 
potuit) ita et a nativitate Joannis incepit dicere. The /cd//.ot shows 
that Lk. does not blame the iroAAoi: he desires to imitate and 
supplement them. It is their attempts that encourage him to write. 
What they have done he may do, and perhaps he may be able to 
improve upon their work. This is his first reason for writing a 

n-apT]Ko\ou0ifjK^Ti. This is his second reason for writing, making 
the argument d fortiori. He has had special advantages and 
qualifications ; and therefore what was allowed to others may be 
still more allowed to him. These qualifications are fourfold, and 
are told off with precision. In the literal sense of " following a 
person closely so as to be always beside him," irapaKoXovBtw 
does not occur in N,T. Here it does not mean that Lk. was 
contemporaneous with the events, but that he had brought himseU 
abreast of them by careful investigation. Comp. the famous 
passage in Dem. De Cor. cap. liii. p. 285 (344), irapaKoXovO-qKora 
rots Trpa.yp.acrw If <*PX? S - 

cLva>0K. This is the^rtf of the four qualifications : he has gone 
back to the very beginning, viz. the promise of the birth of the 
Forerunner. " From the first " is the meaning of avo>0v here, not 
"thoroughly," radicitus, as in Acts xxvi. 5, which would make 
avo>0v almost the same as imcriv. Vulg. has a prindpio^ and d has 
desusum (comp. the French dessus). It is the irao-iy which implies 
thoroughness ; and this is the second point. He has begun at the 
beginning, and he has investigated everything. The Syriac makes 
masc., but there is little doubt that it is neut, and refers to 
in ver. i. 

This is the third point He has done all this 
"accurately." There is no idle boast in any one of the three 
points. No other Gospel gives us this early history about the 
Baptist and the Christ. No other is throughout so full, for of 
170 sections contained in the synoptic narrative 48 are peculiar 
to Lk. And, in spite of the severest scrutiny, his accuracy can 
very rarely be impugned. We cannot be sure whether he means 
to imply that O/C/HO>S was not true of the TroXXo^ but we may be 


sure that none of them could claim all three of these points. In 
any case we have an inspired historian telling us in his inspired 
writings that he is giving us the results of careful investigation. 
From this it seems to follow that an inspired historian may fail in 
accuracy if his investigation is defective. 

leaflets. This is the fourth point, resulting from the other three. 
He does not propose to give a mere collection of anecdotes and 
detached sayings, but an orderly narrative systematically arranged 
Chronological order is not necessarily implied in Ka0ei}9, but 
merely arrangement of some kind. Nevertheless, he probably 
has chronological order chiefly in view. In N.T. the word is 
peculiar to Lk. (viii. i; Acts iii. 24, xi. 4, xviii. 23), as is also 
the more classical #75 (vii. n, ix. 37, etc.); but e^cffjs does not 

KpdrtoT 0eo$i\. The epithet /cparwrros, often given to persons 
of rank (Acts xxiii. 26, xxiv. 3, XXVL 25), is strongly in favour of 
the view that Theophilus was a real person. The name Theophilus 
was common both among Jews (=Jedidiah) and among Gentiles, 
But it was a name likely to be used to represent any pious reader. 
See Lft. on "Acts," D.B? pp. 25, 26. The word /cpartoros occurs 
in N.T. only here and in the Acts, where it is evidently a purely 
official epithet, for the persons to whom it is applied are of bad 

4. iva, ^myvtoS irepl &v KaTT)x^T]S Xoyuy TTJF dcr^aXetaK'. "In 
order that thou'mightest fully know the certainty concerning the 
words wherein thou wast instructed." The Xoyot are not the 
vpdyfiara or historic facts, but the details of the Xoyos or Gospel 
(ver. 2), which "ministers of the word" had communicated to 
Theophilus. The compound iTrtyv^s indicates additional and more 
thorough knowledge. It is very freq. in Lk. and Paul : see esp. 
Rom. L 28, 32 ; i Cor. xui. 12 ; Lft on Col L 9 ; Trench, Syn. 
Ixxv. In N.T. Jeanne"'* "to sound down into the ears, teach 
orally," is found only in Lk. and Paul. The position of T^V 
ao-<j>d\iav gives it solemn emphasis. Theophilus shall know that 
the faith which he has embraced has an impregnable historical 

The idiomatic attraction, re/rt &9 Kantxtifys \6ytar, is best resolved into 
Vpl rfo \&yd>v (As KaTifxtidiis, not rtpl rwx X^ywy reft &p tcaryxWn** Only 
of persons does vpi TWOS stand after KCLTIJXW (Acts xxi 21, 24) : of tkingi 
we have the ace. (Acts zviiL 25 ; Gal. vi 6). These attractions are very freq* 

On the superficial resemblance between this preface and Jos. Con* Apim* i. 
9, 10, see Godet, i. pp. 92, 93, 3eme ed. 1888. The resemblance hardly 
amounts to remarkable coincidence, and such similarities are common m 
literature. It is more interesting to compare this preface with that of the 
medical writer Dioscorides. The opening words of Dioscondes' treatise* reft 
tiXw farptrijs, run thus ; IIoXXtDv ov fdvov dpxaLwv, d\X4 icoi vtuv 


vepl rf)j TUV <t>apfj.dKti)v ffKevaataj re xal tivvApew Kal 8oKtfM<rtas, 0Xrore *Ape?e, 

The date of Dioscondes Pedaaus is uncertain ; but, as Pliny 
does not mention him, he is commonly assigned to the first or second centmy 
A.D. He is said to have been a native of Anazarbus in Cilicia, about fifty 
miles from Tarsus ; and in that case he would almost certainly obtain hii 
medical knowledge in the great school at Tarsus. That he and S. Luke may 
have been there at the same time with S. Paul, seems to be a not impossible 
conjecture. The treatise vcpl fyxalys IrppiKfy, commonly attributed to Hippo- 
crates (*. 460-350 B.C.), begins t "0*6<ro irexfiptiffa^ wcpl lip-put*!* A^-yeo ^ 


These chapters have often been attacked as unhistoricaL 
That Marcion omitted them from his mutilated edition of this 
Gospel is of no moment He did not do so upon critical grounds, 
but because their contents did not harmonize with his doctrine. 
It is more to the point to urge that these early narratives 
lack apostolic authority; that they cover ground which popular 
imagination, in the absence of history, would be sure to fill ; that 
they abound in angelic appearances and other marvels; that 
their form is often highly poetical; and that it is sometimes 
difficult to reconcile them with the narrative of Mt. or with 
known facts of history. To this it may be replied that reserve 
would keep Christ's Mother from making known these details at 
first. Even Apostles may have been ignorant of them, or unwilling 
to make them known until the comparatively late period at which 
Lk. wrote. The dignity, beauty, and spirituality of these narratives 
is strong evidence of their authenticity, especially when contrasted 
with the silly, grotesque, and even immoral details in the apo- 
cryphal gospels. .They abound in historic features, and are 
eminently true to life. Their independence of Mt is evident, 
and both accounts bear the stamp of truthfulness, which is not 
destroyed by possible discrepancies in a few minor points. That 
Lk. is ever at variance with other historians, has still to be proved ; 
and the merit of greater accuracy may still be with him, even if 
such variance exists. 

This Gospel of the Infancy is made up of seven narratives, 
in two parallel groups of three, followed by a supplement, which 
connects these two groups with the main body of the Gospel 

I. i. The Annunication of the Birth of the Forerunner 
(5-25); 2. The Annunciation of the Birth of the Saviour (26-38); 
3. The Visit of the Mother of the Saviour to the Mother oi 
the Forerunner (39-56). 

II. 4. The Birth of the Forerunner (57-80); 5. The Birth of 
the Saviour (ii. 1-20); d The Circumcision and Presentation of 
the Saviour (il 21-40). 


III. 7. The Boyhood of the Saviour (ii. 41-52). 

On the two accounts of our Lord's infancy see E. G S. 
Gibson, Expository 2nd series, iii p. 116 ; Gore, Dissertations on 
Subjects connected with the Incarnation^ pp. 12 ff. : Murray, 1895 

I. 5-25. The Annunciation of the Birth of the Forerunner. 

"When John the Baptist appeared, not the oldest man in 
Palestine could remember to have spoken even in his earliest 
childhood with any man who had seen a prophet . . In these 
circumstances it was an occurrence of the first magnitude^ more 
important far than war or revolution^ when a new prophet actually 
appeared" (Ecce Homo 9 ch. L). The miracles recorded are in 
keeping with this. God was making a new departure in dealing 
with His people. We need not, therefore, be startled if a highly 
exceptional situation is accompanied by highly exceptional facts. 
After more than three centuries of silence, Jehovah again speaks 
by prophecies and signs to Israel. But there is no violent rupture 
with the past in making this new departure. The announcement 
of the rise of a new Prophet is made in the temple at Jerusalem, 
to a priest of the old covenant, who is to be the Prophet's father. 
It is strong evidence of the historic truth of the narrative that no 
miracles are prophesied of the new Prophet, and that after his 
appearance his disciples attribute none to him. 

5. 'EY&TO IK rats iJfUpais. The elegant idiomatic Greek of the 
preface comes abruptly to an end. Although the marks of Lk.'s 
style are as abundant here as in any part of the Gospel, yet the 
form of the narrative is strongly Hebraistic ; so much so that one 
may be confident that he is translating from an Aramaic document 
These first two chapters seem to consist of a series of such docu- 
ments, each with a distinct conclusion (L 80, ii 40, ii. 52). If they 
are historical, the Virgin Mary must have been the source of much 
that is contained in these first two chapters , and she may have 
been the writer of documents used by Lk. In any case, we have 
here the earliest documentary evidence respecting the origins of 
Christianity which has come down to us, evidence which may 
justly be called contemporary. Both eyo/cro and & Tats 

are Hebraistic (see on ver. 39) ; but there is no need to understand 
b after lycvcro, " It came to pass that there was." 

?v or any other verb after lycvcro, " It came to pass 

Rather, "There arose, came into notice," or simply "There was." 

See on iv. 36, and comp. Mk. L 4; Jn. L 6. 

'HfxpSou pcuriX4s TYJS 'loulofaf. Herod "the Great," a title not 


given to him by his contemporaries, who during his last years 
suffered greatly from his cruelty. It is in these last years that the 
narrative of Lk, begins. The Herods were Idumaeans by birth, 1 
though Jews by religion, and were dependent upon the Romans 
for their sovereignty. As Tacitus says: JRegnum ab Antonic 
Herodi datum victor Augustus auxit (Hist. v. 9* 3). 

The name 'E/^fys is contracted from *E/>wf5i?j, and should have iota sub- 
script, which is well supported by early inscriptions. Later inscriptions and \ 
coins omit the iota. In the Codex Ambrosianus of Jc'sephus the name is 
written with iota adscript, H/wcffip (Ant. xi,-xx.). See the numerous 
instances from inscriptions cited by Schurer in the TheoL Litztg. 1892, No. 
21, col. 516. The TOW inserted before jScwtX^w? in A and other texts is in 
accordance with classical usage. But in LXX the art. is commonly omitted 
in such cases, because in Hebrew, as in English, "Saul, lung of Israel/* 
" George, king of England," is the common idiom (Gen. xiv. i, 2, 18, xx. 2 t 
xxvi. I, etc, etc.). See Simcox, Lang. ofN.T. p. 47. 

-njs 'louSaias. This was the title conferred on him by 
the Senate at the request of Antony, Messala, and Atratinus (Jos, 
Ant. xiv. 14. 4). Judaea here may mean " the land of the Jews, 
Palestine" (vii. 17, xxiii. 5; Acts ii. 9, x. 37, XL i, 29). Besides 
Judaea in the narrower sense, Herod's dominions included Samaria, 
Galilee, a great deal of Persea, and Ccele-Syria. For the abundant 
literature on the Herods see D.B? i. p. 1341 ; Herzog, PRE.* ri 
p. 47 ; Schurer, Jewish People in the T. off. C. i. i, p. 400. 

icperfs TIS oKfyem Zaxapias. In the Protevangelium of James 
(viii.), Zacharias is called high priest; and this has been adopted by 
later writers, who have supposed that the incident narrated by Lk. 
took place on the Day of Atonement in the Holy of Holies. But 
the high priest would not have been called lepevs TCS, and it could 
not have been by lot (&axc) that he offered incense on the Day of 
Atonement Priestly descent was much esteemed. The name 
means "Remembered by Jehovah," For oi/fycm see on v. 27. 

Ig <|>rifipuis 'A01& The word tyijfjxpta has two meanings: 
i. "service for a term of days" (Neh. xiii. 30; i Chron. xxv, 8; 
2 Chron. xiii. 10) ; 2. "a course of priests who were on duty for a 
term of days," viz. for a week (i Chron. xxiii. 6, xxviii. 13 ; i Esdr. 
L 2, 1 5). These courses were also called Siatpeo-cw, and by Josephus 
irarpuLi and c^epffies (Ant. vii. 14. 7 ; Vita, i). Abijah was de- 
scended from Eleazar, and gave his name to the eighth of the 
twenty-four courses into which David divided the priests (i Chron. 
xxiv. 10 ; 2 Chron. viii. 14). Of these twenty-four only the courses 
of Jedaiah, Immer, Pashur, and Harim returned from captivity 
(Ezra ii. 36-39) ; but these four were divided again into twenty- 

1 Temfus quoque Herodis alitgena videlicet rcgis etiam ipsum Domtnic* 
ettestatur adventui. Prszdictum namque fuerat^ quia turn dtfirict printeps tx 
Jwfa> dmec veniat qui mitttndus erat (Bede). 


four with the old names. So that Zacharias did not belong to the 
original course of Abijah, for that did not return from exile. Each 
course was on duty twice during the year ; but we know far too 
little about the details of the arrangement to derive any sure chron- 
ology from the statements made by Lk. See on ii. 7. 

Wieseler places the vision of Zacharias early in October A.U.C. 748 or B.C. 6 
(Ckron, Syn. 11. 2, Eng. tr. p. 123). With this result Edersheim agrees (L. and 
T. i. p. 135), as also does Andrews (L. of our Lord, p. 52, ed. 1892). Lewin 
prefers May i6th, B.C. 7 (Fasti Sacn, 836). Caspar! is for July iSth, B.C. 3, 
but remarks "how little reliance is to be placed upon conclusions of this kind 
(Chron. EtnL 42, Eng. tr. p. 57). For the courses of priests, see Herzog, 
PRE* art. Prtestertum im A.T. ; Schurer, Jewish Ptopk in the T. off. C. 
ii I, pp. 216-220. 

IK TOW Ouyarlpfiw "Aaprfy. "He had a wife," not "his 
wife was" (AV.). Lk. follows LXX in omitting the art. with the 
gen. after Svydryp : comp. xiii. 16 and the quotations ML xxi 5 
and Jn. xii. 15, and contrast Mt xiv. 6. To be a priest and 
married to a priest's daughter was a double distinction. It was a 
common summary of an excellent woman, " She deserves to many 
a priest." In the fullest sense John was of priestly birth. See 
Wetst. : Sacrosancta pra&atrsoris nobilitas non solum a parentibus^ 
sed etiam a progenitoribus gloriosa descendit (Bede). Aaron's wife 
was Elisabeth Elisheba=" God is my oath." 

6. SIKCUOU Once a term of high praise, and meaning righteous- 
mess in the fullest sense (Ezek. xviii. 5, 9, ii, 19, 20, 22, 24, 26); 
but it had come to mean little more than careful observance of 
legal duties. The addition of the Hebraistic ivuvrlw roO Ocou 
/'Acts viii, 21 ; Gen. vi. 8, n, 13, vii. i, x. 9) gives SIKOUM its full 
meaning : Zacharias and Elisabeth were saints of the (XT. type. 
Symeon is called StWos (ii. 25), and Joseph (Mt. L 19). Comp. 
SiKdtov etvcu /x* 6 ro/jios ^ <f>vcri<s & a/ui irapci^e TO> @(5 (Eur. Ion. 
643). The Gospel was to restore to Sticotos its original spiritual 
meaning. See detached note on the word SIKCUOS and its cognates^ 
Rom. i. 17. For dfi^orepoi see on v. 7. 

iropeufyievoi IK irdo-ats rai$ liroXcus Kal iKai<a\ia&iv T. K. Another 
Hebraism (Deut. xxviii. 9 ; i Sam. viiL 3, 5 ; i Bangs iil 14, etc.). 
The distinction often drawn, that evroXal are moral, while &icocii- 
pjara are ceremonkl, is baseless ; the difference is, Aat the latter 
is the vaguer term. Here, although they differ in gender, they 
have only one article and adjective, because they are so similar tn 
meaning. Comp. Col. ii. 22 ; Rev. v. 12 ; and see Win. xix. 3 c^ 
p. 157. The two words are found combined Gen. rxvL 5 and 
Deut, iv. 40, For Sucaic^aTa, "things declared right, ordinances," 
comp. Rom. iL 26 and Heb. ix. i, and see note in Sp. Comm. on 
i Cor. v. 6 as to the force of the termination -/io. The genitive 
here, as in Rom. ii. 26 and viii. 4, expresses the authority from 


which the ordinance springs. The Sjttf&irroi anticipates what 
follows, and, of course, does not mean that they were sinless. No 
one is sinless; but the conduct of some is free from reproach. 
Comp. Phil iii. 6. 

7. KCU OUK r\v auroTs T&VOK. This calamity is grievous to all 
Orientals, and specially grievous to Jews, each of whom is ambitious 
of being among the progenitors of the Messiah, It was commonly 
believed to be a punishment for sin (Lev. xx. 20, 21; Jer. xxii. 30). 
The story of Glaucus, who tempted the oracle at Delphi, and " at 
the present time has not a single descendant" (Hdt. vi. 86. 16), 
indicates a similar belief among the Greeks. Zacharias and 
Elisabeth had the sorrow of being childless, as Anna of being 
husbandless, and all three had their consolation. Comp. the 
births of Samson and Samuel, both of whom were Nazirites, and 
of Isaac. 

Ko0<5ri. Peculiar to Lk. " Because that " (xix. 9 ; Acts il 24, xvii. 31), 
or "according as" (Acts 11. 45, iv. 35). In class. Grk. editors commonly 
write *&$' 8 TU The clause xal &fji,<f>brepot . . . ^<rai does not depend upon 
KaB6rt t which would be illogical, but is a separate statement. Their age 
would not explain why they had had no children, but why they were not likely 
to have any. " They had no child, because that Elisabeth was barren ; and 
they were both advanced in years," so that they had no hope of children. 

Iv rats rjju^pais affray. Hebraistic : in ckss. Grk. 
we should rather have had 777 J}\LKL<. In LXX we have irpopeft. 
ypipais, or v/Apa>v, or r&v ^epaj/ (i Kings L i ; Gen. xxiv. i ; Josh 
xiii i). Levites were superannuated at about sixty, but a priest 
served as long as he was able. 

8. 'EylvcTo IXo-xe. On the various constructions with frybm fa 
Lk. see detached note at the end of this chapter ; and on Iv T<j> tcparc^cv 
crfrlv, *' while he was officiating as priest," wnich is another very favourite 
construction with Lk., see on iu 21. The verb kparfveiv is freq. in LXX, 
but occurs nowhere else in N.T. It is not found earlier than LXX, but is not 
rare in later Greek. See Kennedy, Sources of N. T. Grk. p. 119. The phrase 
Karci T& I0os is peculiar to Lk. in N.T. (ii. 42, xxii. 39), but occurs in Theod. 
Bel 15 ; and llos occurs ten times in his writings, and only twice elsewhere 
(Jn. xix. 40 ; Heb. x. 25). Comp. KcwA rb eiOurnivov (ii. 27) and icari rd clw66t 
(iv. 1 6 ; Acts xvu". 2). It is for the sake of those who were uniamihar with the 
usages of the temple tiiat he says that it was " according to the custom of the 
priest's service " that it was decided by lot which priest should offer incense. 
To take /card rb 36os Tys lepartas with what precedes robs it of all point ; it is 
tautology to say that he was officiating as priest according to the custom of *he 
priest's service. But the number of cases in which Lk. has a clause or word 
which is grammatically amphibolous is very large ; w. 25, 27, ii. 22, where 
see note. Tlie word lepareta, occurs in N.T. only here and Heb. vii. 5. *' In 
relation to lepuavvr} (Heb. vii. II, 12, 24) it expresses the actual service of 
the priests, and not the office of priesthood" (Wsctt on Heb. vii. 5). 

TOU Ou/ucurai,. The casting of lots took place twice a day, 
at the morning and the evening offering of incense. In the morn' 


ing the drawing lots for offering the incense was the third and chief 
of a series of drawings, four in all ; in the evening it was the only 
one. We do not know whether this was morning or evening. No 
priest might have this honour twice ; and the number of priests 
was so great that many never offered the incense. The fortunate 
lot was a ^<o$ XevK^ to which there is a possible reference 
Rev. ii. 17. The priest who obtained it chose two others to help 
him ; but, when they had done their part, they retired, leaving him 
alone in the Holy Place. For the very elaborate details see 
Edersh. The Temple, its Ministry and Services, pp. 129-142. 

The gen. rov Bv/ucurtu is probably governed by IXa^c, which in class. Grk, 
commonly has a gen. when it means " became possessed of," and an ace. 
when it means *' obtained by lot" (Acts L 17 ; comp. 2 Pet. i. i). In I Sam. 
xiv. 47 we have SooX Xaxe [at. /. /cara/cX^poOreu] rov j3a<rtXJi' M 'la-paiJX. 
The lffe\6&v els rbv va6v must be taken with tivfuavcu, not with f\ax ' "he 
obtained by lot to go in and burn incense," not " after entering into the va,6s 
he obtained by lot to burn incense." The lots were cast before he entered the 
Holy Place, which was the front part of the rate. 

1<X irai> T u\TJ0os fy TOU Xaou irpoo-cuxojwi'oi'. Cod Am. has the 
same order, omnis multitude erat pofuli orans. The position of 
TOV Xaov is against taking rjv with wpoa-f^o^^vov as the analytical 
tense instead of the imperf., a constr. of which Lk. is very fond 
(w. 20, 21, 22, il 33, iv. 17, 31, 38, 44, etc); ty may mean 
" was there," or " there was," and TOV Aaov be epexegetic of TO 
TrAiJtfos. But certainty is unattainable and unimportant We need 
not infer from TCW r irA^tfos that there was a great multitude As 
compared with the solitary priest in the vaos, all the worshippers 
outside were a TrXijQos. The word is a favourite one with Lk., who 
uses it twenty-five times against seven in the rest of N.T. It is 
remarkable that prayer is not expressly mentioned in the Law as 
part of public worship, except in connexion with the offering of the 
first-fruits {Deut. xxvi. 15). But comp. i Kings viii. 33-48; 
2 Chron. vi. 14-42 ; Is. IvL 7. The people were inside the UpoV, 
although outside (2<o) the vaos, and the other priests would be 
between them and the vaos. 

11. c5<|>0Y) 8c afirw ftyyeAos Kuptou. It was the most solemn 
moment of his life, when he stood alone in that sacred spot to offer 
the pure and ideal symbol of the imperfect prayer which he and 
those outside were offering. The unique circumstances contri- 
buted to make him conscious of that unseen world which is around 
all of us (2 Kings vL 17 ; comp. Lk, xv. 7, 10). For &<t>0vj see on 
xxiL 43 ; and for an analysis of the psychological facts see Lange, 
Z. of Christ, bk. ii. pt ii. 2 ; Eng. tr. i. 264. But must we not 
choose between admitting an objective appearance and rejecting 
the whole as a myth? To explain it as a "false perception" 01 
optical delusion, /.<?. a purely subjective result of psychological 


causes, seems to be not admissible. In that case Zacharias, like Lotd 
Herbert of Cherbury, 1 would have accepted the sign which he sup- 
posed that he had received. To believe in the reality of a subject- 
ive appearance and not believe its testimony is a contradiction. 
Moreover, the psychological explanation leaves the dumbness to be 
explained. Again, we have similar appearances ver. 26, ii. 9, 13, 
xxii. 43, xxiv. 4. Can we accept here an explanation which is very 
difficult (ii. 9, 13) or inadmissible (xxiv. 4) elsewhere? Are all 
these cases of false perception ? See Paley, Evidences of Christi- 
anity, prop. ii. ch. i. ; Mill, Pantheistic Principles, ii. i. 4, p. 123, 
2nd ed. 1861 ; Edersh. L. <5r* 71 i. p. 142, ii. p. 751. 

K Scguw TOU 0ucria<mjpiou. The place of honour. It was " the 
right side of the altar," not of Zacharias, who was facing it Comp. 
Acts vii. 55, 56. The right side was the south side, and the Angel 
would be between the altar and the golden candlestick. On the 
left, or north side, of the altar was the table with the shewbread. 

12* <j>o|3os lire-irco-ey iir" a,Mv. Fear is natural when man be- 
comes suddenly conscious of contact with the unseen : Humanas, 
fragihtatis est spiritualis creature visione turbari (Bede). Comp. 
ii. 9, ix. 34; Judg. vi. 22, xiii. 22 ; Job iv. 15, etc. For the phrase 
comp. Acts xix. 17; Exod. xv. 16; Judith xv. 2. In class. Grk. 
the dat. is more usual : Thuc. iii. 87. i ; Xen. Anab. ii. 2. 19 ; Eur. 
Andr. 1042. 

13. 6iTri> 8 irpds auroK. Both flircv Be and flirty srpos are very 
freq. in Lk., who prefers eiirev Si to /cat ctircv even at the beginning 
of narratives, and uses TT/OOS avrov, avrovs, /e.r.X hi preference to 
aru>, a^rots, K.T.A., after verbs of speaking, answering, etc, to an 
extent which is quite remarkable (w* 18, 19, 34, 55, 61, 73, 
ii. 15, 18, 20, 34, 48, 49, etc etc.). This zrpos is so strong a mark 
of his style that it should be distinguished in translation : tlirw 
?rpos avrdv, " He said unto him," and ewrev a&r<3, " He said to him.*' 
But not even RV. does this. 

Mr) <|>opoG* This gracious charge is specially common in Lk. 
(ver. 30, ii. 10, vui. 50, xii. 4, 7, 32 ; Acts xviii. 9, xxvii. 24), 
Bengel says of it, Primum alloquium coeleste in aurora JV*T. per 
Lucam am&nissime descripta. Comp. Gen. xv. i; Josh. viii. t; 
Is. xliii. i, 5, xliv. 2; Jer. xlvi, 27, 28; Dan. x. 12. 

StoTi. " Because," as generally in N.T. Comp. ii. 7, xxi 28. 
It never means "therefore"; not Rom. i. 19 nor i Thes. ii 18. 

eunjKou'o-drj rj Se'rjo-fe <rou. "Thy supplication was heard," at the 
time when it was offered. The pass, is used both of the petition 
(Acts x. 31 ; Ps. iv. 2) and of the petitioner (Mt vi. 7 ; Heb. v. 7). 
The word Scions implies personal need \ it is a "special petition for 
the supply of want" (Lft on Phil. iv. 6; Trench, Syn. Ii.). Un- 
like Trpocrevxi;, it may be used of petitions to men The word 
1 Life, written by himself, s*djin* t pp. 171 ff. ed. 1792, pp. 24* ff. ed* 1824, 


favours, but by no means proves, the view that the prayer of 
Zacharias was for a son. And the context at first seems to con- 
firm this. But would Zacharias have made his private wishes the 
main subject of his prayer at so unique an opportunity? Would 
he have prayed for what he regarded as impossible? As Bede 
remarks, Nemo orat quod $e accefturum desperat Having prayed 
for it as possible, would he have refused to believe an Angel who 
told him that the petition was granted? It is much more probable 
that he and the people were praying for the redemption of Israel, 
for the coming of the Messiah's kingdom ; and it is this supplica- 
tion which was heard. To make S^o-is refer to habitual suppli- 
cation, and not to the prayer offered with the incense, seems 

What Didon points out (p. 298} in quite a different connexion seems to 
have point here. It was an axiom with the Rabbins that a prayer in which 
there was no mention of the kingdom of God was no prayer at all (BdbyL^ 
Beracotk, fol. 40, 2) ; and in the ntual of the temple the response of the 
people to the prayers of the priests was, " Blessed be the name of the glory of 
the Kingdom of God for ever'* (BcAyl^ Taamth* foL 16, a) * Jtsus Ckritt 9 
ed. 1891. See also Edeish. TJu TtmpU, p. 127. 

K<U T) yun^ orou "E\eur<$T -ytKn^cret uloV cm. Not fjywrjydj). 

"For thy wife shall bear thee a son" would have made it dear 
that the son was the answer to the S?o-fc$. But "and thy wife 
shall bear thee a son " may mean that this is an additional boon, 
which (as ver. 17 shows) is to prepare the way for the blessing 
prayed for and granted. Thus, like Solomon, Zacharias receives 
the higher blessing for which he prayed, and also the lower blessing 
for which he did not pray. 

Tevvdu is generally used of the father (Mt i. 1-16 ; Acts vii. 8, 29; Gen. 
r. 3-30, ad. 10-28, etc.) j but sometimes of the mother (ver 57, xxiii. 3Q j 
Jn. xvi. 21). The best authorities give 'Iwdi^s, with only one * (\VH. il 
App. p. 159). In LXX we have 'ludrtjs (2 Chron. xxviii. 12) ; Iwbw 
2 Chron. xvii. 15 ; Neb. xii. 13) ; 'Icwdr (Neh. vi. 18) ; *Ii (2 King! 
xxv. 23 5 comp Jn. apo. 15-17). All these forms are abbreviations of Jeho- 
hanan, " Jehovah's gift/ 1 or '* God is gracious." Gotthold is a German name 
of similar meaning. It was a Rabbinical saying that the names of six were 
given before they were born Isaac, Ishmael, Moses, Solomon, Jonah, od 

14. iroXXol lirt rg ycK&rct afoou xapfi<nmu With the 
here contrast iram T^ Xo^ in iL io The joy at the appearance of 
a Prophet after centuries of need was immense, although not uni- 
versal. The Pharisees did not dare to say that John was not a 
Prophet (Mt. xxL 26) ; and Herod, until driven to it, did not dare 
to put him to death (Mt xiv. 5). The word dyoAAiWis means 
"extreme joy, exultation." It is not class., but is freq, in LXX. 
Elsewhere in N.T. only ver. 44; Acts iL 46; Jude 24; Hek i 9 
(from Ps. xliv. 8). 


In class. Grk. wipei* more often has the simple dat., but M is usual in 
N.T. (xiu. 17 ; Acts xv. 31 ; Mt. xviii. 13, etc.). It marks the basis of the 
joy. The reading yeyy^ffei (G X T) for yevfoet (tf A B C D) probably comes 
i in ver. 13. 

15. lorat yctp fi^yas Mmo? [TOU] Kupiou. For he shall be great 
in the truest sense of the term. Whatsoever a character man has 
before God, of that character he really is. 

The adj. frdirtos is found in Theocr. (xxii. 152) and in LXX, 
as a prep, seems to be confined to LXX and N.T. It is not in Mt. or Mk., 
but is specially freq. in Lk. (w. 17, 19, 75, iy. 7, v. 18, 25, etc.), as also 
in Rev. The phrase ivtoirlov TOV Kvptov or 6eou is a Hebraism (xu. 6, xvi. 151 
Acts iv. 19, vii. 46, x. 31, 33; Judg. xi. n j I Sam. x. 19; 2 Sam* v. 3, 
ri. 5). The preposition retains this meaning in modern Greek. 

al o-LKcpa ou ji?j iriT). He is to drink neither wine nor 
any intoxicating liquor other than wine. The same Hebrew word 
is rendered sometimes o-iKcpa, sometimes ^cflvoyia, and sometimes 
crtKepa. peOvo-fJui (Lev. x. 9 ; Num. vi. 3 ; Judg. xiii. 4, 7, 14). 
Wiclif here has "ne wine ne syder." See D.B? Bit "Drink, 
Strong." John is to be a Nazirite, not only for a time, as was 
usual, but for all his life, as Samson and Samuel This is not 
disproved by the omission of the command not to cut his hair 
(Edersh. The Tempk, p. 322). Eusebius (Pr&. Evang. vi. 10. 8) 
has gen. o-t'/cepo?, and oWparos is also quoted ; but o-uccpa is usually 

werfjiaTos Ayiou irXvja-^creTab. This is in obvious contrast to 
otvor /cat crt/ccpa. In pkce of the physical excitement of strong 
drink he is to have the supernatural inspiration of the Holy Spirit 
The whole phrase is peculiar to Lk. (w. 41, 67; Acts ii. 4, 
iv. 8, 31, ix. 17, xiii. 9) ; and the two elements of it are specially 
characteristic of him. Excepting Mt xxii. 10, xxvii. 48; Jn. 
xix. 29, irtfMrXyfu occurs only in Lk., who uses it twenty-two times. 
Mt has the expression "Holy Spirit" five times, Mk. and Jn. each 
four times. Lk. has it fifty-three times, of which twelve are in the 
Gospel. He uses three forms: ttv&pA fytov (L 15, 35, 41, 67, 
[ii. 25,] iii. 16, iv. i, xL 13}; TO 5ytov Tirefyux (xii. 10, 12); and TO 
flwfyia TO aytov (ii. 26, iii. 22). According to Schoettgen (i. 
p. 255), "to be filled with the Holy Spirit is " locutiofudxis famili- 
arts. He gives one example. Comp. the contrast in Eph. v. 18. 

In IK KOtXCas |x.t)rp&9 avTov. A Hebraism (Ps. xxii. 1 1, bcxi. 6; !. 

xlix. i, 5: comp. Judg. xiii. 5, 7, xvi. 17; Job xxxi. 18, etc.); instead of 
the more classical 4ic yeverytf with or without etBfc (Horn. //. xxiv. 535, OcL 
xviii. 6; Arist Eth. Nic. vi. 13. I, vii. 14. 4, viii. 12. 6). For the In 
comp. n K jSp^eoj, n dr' dp^s, &n Kal At ira.p6vTtav, where Irt seems to 
mean " even." The expression does not imply that John was filled with the 
Spirit before he was horn (ver. 41). In LXX jcotAla is oft*n used of the 
womb (see esp. Jer. i. 5) ; hut this is very rare in class. Grk. 


16, 17. The two personal characteristics just stated subjection 
of the flesh and sovereignty of the spirit will manifest themselves 
in two external effects, a great religious revival and the prepara- 
tion for the Messianic kingdom. The first of these was the 
recognized work of every Prophet Israel, through sin, was con- 
stantly being alienated from God; and it was one of the chief 
functions of a Prophet to convert the people to God again (Jer, 
iii 7, 10, 14, xviil S ; Ezek. iii. 19 ; Dan. ix. 13). 

K*l a-6r<Js. The personal pronouns are much more used in N.T. than in 
class. Grk., esp. in the oblique cases. But even in the nom, the pronoun is 
sometimes inserted, although there is little or no emphasis. Lk. is very fond 
of beginning sentences witn icol atfr6s, even where a#r$ can hardly mean 
41 he on his part," as distinct from others (iii. 23, v. 14, 17, vi. 20, etc). In 
Tpoc\cv<reTat we have another mark of Lk/s style. Excepting Mk. vi. 33 
and 2 Cor. ix. 5, the verb is peculiar to Lk. in N.T. (mi. 47 ; Acts xii. 10, 
**- 5, 13)* 

auroG. "Before God, 19 who comes to His people in 
the person of the Messiah (Is. xL i-ii; MaL iii 1-5). It is 
unlikely that avrov means the Messiah, who has not yet been 
mentioned There is no analogy with <rfrd ?<o, tpse dixit> where 
the pronoun refers to some one so well known that there is no 
need to mention him by name. For &&ww see on ver. 15 ; and 
for SuWjus, on iv. 14, 36. Elijah is mentioned, not as a worker of 
miracles, for "John did no sign" (Jn. x. 41), but as a preacher of 
repentance: it was in this that the Baptist had his spirit and 
power. For Rabbinic traditions respecting Elijah as the Fore- 
runner see Edersh, Z. 6* T. iL p. 706. 

The omission of the articles before **eifyian and 8vrd,fui is probably due 
to the influence of an Aramaic original, in which the gen. which follows 
would justify the omission. Proper names in -as pure commonly have gen. 
in -ov (Mt i. 6, iii. 3) ; but here HXefo is the true reading. 

m<rrp&|/cu KapBias ifarlpw fcirl r&pa, The literal interpretation 
here makes good sense, and perhaps, on the whole, it is the best 
In the moral degradation of the people even parental affection had 
languished : comp. Ecdus. xlviiL 10. Genuine reform strengthens 
family ties; whatever weakens them is no true reform. Or the 
meaning may be that the patriarchs will no longer be ashamed of 
their offspring: comp. Is. bciii. 16. In any case, farciMg is not to 
be referred to TC/CVOU It is not the disobedience of children to 
parents that is meant, but that of the Jews to God. 

The Vulg. renders dretleft by incrcdibite, for which some MSS. have 
incrtdvlosi comp. dissociabilis, pcnttrabilis for adjectives in -tnlis with this 
force. Lat Vet. varies : ineruditos (/), non consentientts (d) t contumaccs (e\ 

Ir <|povijori SiKaCwv. The prep, of rest after a verb of motion expresses 
the result of the motion (viiL 17 ; Mt xiv. 3) : "Turn tnem so as to be \& 
the wisdom rf the just." For fpfapu see Lft. on CoL L 91 the wos4 


occurs only here and Eph. L 8 in N.T. De Wette, Blerk, and others main- 
tain that <t>p6vycru here means simply "disposition," Gtsinnung. In what 
follows it is better to make roi/u<r<u dependent upon ^rtorp^cu, not 
coordinate with it. The preparation is the consequence of the conversion, 
and the final object of the rpoeXeuVcrcw : m Domtnus populum imparatum 
majestate tua obUrctf (Beng.). 

18. KarA. ri yvdxropai TOUTO; The very question asked by 
Abraham (Gen. xv, 8) : " In accordance with what shall I obtain 
knowledge of this ? " f>. What shall be in harmony with it, so as 
to be a sign of it? Comp. the cases of Gideon (Judg. vl 36-39) 
and of Hezekiah (2 Kings xx. 8), who asked for signs ; also of 
Moses (Exod. iv. 2-6) and of Ahaz (Is. vil n), to whom signs 
were given unasked The spirit in which such requests are made 
may vary much, although the form of request may be the same , 
and the fact that Zacharias had all these instances to instruct him 
made his unbelief the less excusable. By his eyo> yap 1/1,1, K.T.X, he 
almost implies that the Angel must have forgotten the fact 

19. iiroKpiOels 6 ayycXos etircv. In Attic diroKpbo/wu, in Homeric and 
Ionic inroKpLvofjLOt t is used in the sense of "answering." In N.T. faoicpl- 
rofuu occurs only once (xx. 20), and there of " acting a part," not " answer- 
ing": comp. 2 Mac. v. 25. But diroKpiGeLs for the class. faroKpiv&fixrQi 
(which is rare in N.T.) marks the decay of the middle voice. In bibl. Grk. 
the middle voice is dying ; in mod. Grk. it is dead. Machon, a comic poet 
about B.C. 250, is perhaps the earliest writer who uses dtreKpLByv like 
ATeKptvdMv in the sense of "replied, answered." In LXX, as in N.T., 
drcKptJtdfjLyv is rare (Judg. v. 29 [A] ; I Kings ii. I ; I Chron. x. 13). See 
Veitch, Greek Verbs* p. 78. 

19. *Eyw iju ra|3pirjX. Gabriel answers his fyi el/u with 
another. "Thou art old, and not likely to have children, but 
I am one whose word is to be believed" : dyycX^ cwriorcts, KCU T 
AirooTctXavrt (Eus.). The names of two heavenly beings are given 
us in Scripture, Gabriel (Dan. viii. 16, ix. 21) and Michael (Dan. 
x 13, 21, xii. i j Jude 9 ; Rev. xii. 7) ; other names were given in 
the later Jewish tradition. It is one thing to admit that such 
names are of foreign origin, quite another to assert that the belief 
which they represent is an importation. Gabriel, the "Man of 
God," seems to be the representative of angelic ministry to man ; 
Michael, " Who is like God," the representative of angelic opposi- 
tion to Satan. In Scripture Gabriel is the angel of mercy, Michael 
the angel of judgment In Jewish legend the reverse is the case, 
proving that the Bible does not borrow Jewish fables. In the 
Targums Gabriel destroys Sennacherib's army; in the O.T. he 
instructs and comforts Daniel. The Rabbis said that Michael flies 
in one flight, Gabriel in two, Elijah in four, and Death in eight ; 
Le. mercy is swifter than judgment, and judgment is swifter than 

I irafoTi)ic&9 {yitaioK TOU Geou. See on ver. 15. Gabriel is " the 


angel of His presence " (Is. Ixiii. 9 ; comp. Mt. xviii. 10). " Stand* 
ing before" implies ministering. In LXX the regular phrase is 
irapaorrffvai o/oMrtov (Job i. 6, which is a close parallel to this; i Kings 
xviL i, xviii. 15 ; 2 Kings iii. 14, v. i6V It is also used of service 
to a king (i Kings x. 8). But when Gehazi "stood before his 
master," we have wapeamj/cet IT/JOS TOV Kvptov avrov (2 Kings v. 25). 

Only here and ix. 27 does Lk. use the unsyncopated form of the perf. part 
of t<rrrj/u and its compounds. Elsewhere he prefers &m6s to IVTIIK&S (i. 1 1, 
v. I, 2, xviii. 13 ; Acts iv. 14, vii. 55, etc.). In Mt xxvii. 47 and Mk. ix. 
I and xi. 5, <m?jc6rci' is the right reading. In Jn. the unsyncopated form 
is common. 

&Tre<rrd\t\v XaXijorai irpos crc ica! efiayyeXuraaOai croi Taora. This 
reminds Zacharias of the extraordinary favour shown to him, and 
so coldly welcomed by him. It is the first use in the Gospel 
narrative of the word which was henceforward to be so current, 
and to mean so much. In LXX it is used of any good tidings 
(2 Sam. i. 20 ; i Chron. x. 9), but especially of communications 
respecting the Messiah (Is. xl 9, Iii. 7, Ix, 6, IxL i). See on ii. 10 
and iv. 18. 

20. Kal ISoD car) crtanrajy Kal fiJj Buydfiecos XaXrjcrau The iBov is 
Hebraistic, but is not rare in class. Grk. It introduces something 
new with emphasis. Signum poscenti datur congruum, quamvis non 
optatum (Beng.). The analytical form of the rut marks the dura- 
tion of the silence (comp. v. 10, vi. 40 ?, xviL 35 ?, xxi. 17); and ^ 
8wa/*,6vos, K.T.X., is added to show that the silence is not \ voluntary 
act, but the sign which was asked for (comp. Dan. x. 15). Thus 
his wrong request is granted in a way which is at once a judgment 
and a blessing ; for the unbelief is cured by the punishment For 
of dumbness comp. 4 Mac. x. 18. 

We have here one of many parallels in expression between Gospel and 
Acts. Comp. this with Acts xuL n ; i. 39 with Acts i. 15 ; i. 66 with Acts 
xL 21 ; ii 9 with Acts xii. 7 ; xv. 20 with Acts xx. 37 ; xxi. 18 with Acts 
xxvii. 34 ; xxiv. 19 with Acts vii, 22. 

In N.T. M with the participle is the common constr., and in mod. Grk. 
U is the invariable use. In Lk. there is only one instance of od with a parti- 
ciple (vi. 42). See Win. Iv. 5. /3, pp. 607-610 ; Lft. Epp. oj St. Paul, p. 39, 
1895. The combination of the negative with the positive statement of the 
same thing, although found in class. Grk., is more common in Heb. literature. 
In Acts xiu. ii we have &y rv<p\bs M p\4irw, comp. Jn. i. 3, 20, iii. 16, 
x. 5, 18, xviii. 20, xx. 27 ; Rev. ii. 13, iii. 9 ; Ps. Ixxxix. 30, 31, 48 ; 2 Sam. 
xiv. 5 ; Is. xxxviu. i, etc. 

axpi ^s ^|Ji^pas Gal. iii. 19 is the only certain exception to the rule 
that &x&t n ot &xP ts > usually precedes vowels in N.T. Comp. xvii. 27, xxi. 
24, and see on xvi. 16. For the attraction, comp. Acts L 2 ; Mt. xxiv. 38. 
Attractions are specially freq. in Lk. See on iu. 19. 

&vO* v. Only in this phrase does drrl suffer elision in N.T. It is 
equivalent to dwi roiJrwy 5ri, "for that, because" (xix. 44; Acts xii. 23; 
a Thes. iL 10 ; Lev. xxvL 43 ; 2 Kings xxii. 17 ; Ezek. v. 11). It is found 
in class. Grk. (Soph. Ant. 1068 ; Aristoph. Plttt. 434). 



oTrirct* Stronger than the simple relative: "which are of such ft 
character that" Comp. ii 10, vii. 37, 39, viii. 3, 15. Almost always in nom. 

tU T&V icaip&v airw. That which takes place in a time may be regarded 
as entering into that time : the words go on to their fulfilment Comp. tit rb 
MAX* (xiii 9) and t ft rd /Mro$> ffdppwrov (Acts xiii. 42). 

flL jjr 6 Xoo$ vpooBoKdp. As in ver. 20, the analytical tense 
marks the duration of the action. Zacharias was longer than was 
customary; and the Talmud states that the priests were accustomed 
to return soon to prevent anxiety. It was feared that in so sacred 
a place they might incur God's displeasure, and be slain (Lev. xvi 
13). Hence !0afy,ao> IK r<f xpwi&iv, "They were wondering while 
he tarried** Comp. ver. 8, and see on iil 21. The common 
rendering, " at his tarrying," or " because he tarried," quod tardaret % 
is improbable even if possible. This would have been otherwise 
expressed : cOa,vfjuaov U, (ii. 33, iv. 22, ix, 43, etc.), which D reads 
here; or Sia (Mk. vi. 6; Jn. vii. 21); or ort (XL 38; Jn. iii. 7, iv. 
27); or * P l (ii. 18). 

28. OUK iSiWro XaXrjcrai atirois. He ought to pronounce the 
benediction (Num. vi. 24-26) from the steps, either alone or with 
other priests. His look and his inability to speak told them at 
once that something extraordinary had taken place ; and the sacred 
circumstances would suggest a supernatural appearance, even if his 
signs did not make this dear to them. 

The compound Jir^yvcwrav implies clear recognition and full knowledge 
(v. 22, aodv. 16, 31) ; and the late Form 6irro<rfav (for fyw) is commonly used 
of supernatural sights (xxiv. 23 ; Acts xxyi. 19 ; 2 Cor. xii. I ; Dan. ix. 23, 
x. I, 7, 8, 16). For Kftl erfrds, "he on his part," as distinct from the con- 
gregation, see on ver. 17, and Win. xxii. 4. b, p. 187. The periphrastic tense 
^v oiavcuttv again calls attention to the continued action. The verb is found 
here only in N.T., but occurs twice in LXX (Ps. xxxiv. 19; Ecclus. xxvii. 
22). In Stlpeivc ico)cf)<5s both the compound and the tense emphasize the fact 
that it was no mere temporary seizure (xxiL 28 ; Gal. ii. 5 ; 3 Pet hi. 4). 

23. &s l-irXifcOifjorap at %<?pai -rijs Xen-oupyi'as aurou. When the 
week for which the course of Abijah was on duty for public service 
was at an end. See on w. 15 and 57. In class. Grk. Xtrov/>yta 
(Aecos, Ipyov) is freq. of public service undertaken by a citizen at 
his own expense. In bibl, Grk, it is used of priestly service in the 
worship of God (Heb. viii. 6, ix. 21; Num. viii. 22, xvi. 9, xviii 4; 
2 Chron. xxxi. 2), and also of service to the needy (2 Cor. ix. 12: 
PhiL ii. 30). 

AirijXGei' els TOP otico? atfroo. This was not in Jerusalem, in the 
Ophel quarter, where many of the priests resided, but in an un- 
named town in the hill-country south of Jerusalem (ver. 39). It is 
probable that most of the priests who did not live in the city itself 
resided in the towns and villages in the neighbourhood. Con- 
venience would suggest that they should live inside Judaea. Lt 
Neh. ad. 10-19 we have. 1192 priests in Jerusalem ; in i Chron. ix, 


13 we have 1760. Later authorities speak of 24,000; but such 
figures are very untrustworthy. The whole question of the resi- 
dences of the priests is an obscure one, and Josh. xxi. must not be 
quoted as evidence for more than a projected arrangement That 
it was carried into effect and maintained^ or that it was revived after 
the Exile, is a great deal more than we know. Schurer, Jewish 
People in the T. ofj. C. ii. i, p. 229. 

24. <rw&a,$v. The word occurs eleven times in Lk. against 
five times elsewhere. He alone uses it in the sense of conceiving 
offspring, and only in these first two chapters (w. 31, 36, ii. 21). 
This sense is common in medical writers and in Aristotle. Hobart 
remarks that the number of words referring to pregnancy and 
barrenness used by Lk. is almost as great as that used by Hippo- 
crates : & yaor/H e^ctv (xxL 23), eyicvos (ii. 5), oretpa (L 7), are/cyo? 
(xx. 28). And, excepting h yaorpt ej(iv, all of these are peculiar 
to himself in N.T. (Med. Lang, of Lk. p. 91). 

Trepi&pupi> cau-rV /Jitjyas Wire. The reflexive pronoun brings 
out more forcibly than the middle voice would have done that the 
act was entirely her own (Acts xxiiL 14; i Cor. XL 31; i Jn. L 8) ; 
and the compound verb implies all round^ complete concealment 
Her motive can only be conjectured ; but the enigmatical conduct 
and remark are evidence of historic truth, for they would not be 
likely to be invented The five months are the first five months; 
and at the end of them it would be evident that she had ceased 
to be 17 orctpa (ver. 36). During these five months she did not 
wish to risk hearing a reproach, which had ceased to be true, but 
which she would not care to dispute. She withdrew, therefore, 
until all must know that the reproach had been removed. 

The form Acpv/Sor is late : in class. Grk. Acpi/^a is used. But a present 
gp&pu is found, of which this might be the imperfect. 

It can hardly be accidental that /wjv is scarcely ever used in N.T. in a 
literal sense by any writer except Lk., who has it fiye times hi his Gospel 
and five times in the Acts. The chronological details involved in tnii 
frequent use are the results of the careful investigation of which he writes in 
the preface. The other passages are Gal. iv. 10; Jas. v. 17, and six times 
in Revelation. So also trot occurs fifteen times in Lk. and six in Mt Mk. 
and Jn. 

25. ImiSep &4>\iK oVi86s fiou h ApOp&roif. The object of 

TSev is neither e/te understood (as all English Versions except 
Wic. and Rhem.) nor TO oWSo's /*<w (Hofmann), but <tyAciv: 
"watched to take away, taken care to remove." The constr. seems 
to be unique; but comp. Acts xv. 14. Alford and Holtzmann 
translate "hath designed, condescended to remove "; but can 
eimSev mean that? Elsewhere in N.T. it occurs only Acts iv. 29; 
but in class. Grk. it is specially used of the gods regarding human 
affairs (Aesch Suppl i. 1031 ; Sept. 485). Hdt L 124. a is not 


rightly quoted as parallel. Omitting eVcTScv, Rachel makes the 
same remark : 'A$a\a> 6 cos ftov TO oraSos (Gen. xxx. 23 ; comp. 
Ps. criii 9; Is. iv. i); but the different position of the pov is 
worth noting. In fr dvflpowrois we have another amphibolous 
expression (see on ver. 8). It may be taken with d^eAe^, but 
more probably it belongs to ri oVeiSos /*ov (ver. 36). 

fie-38. The Annunciation of the Birth of the Saviour. 1 

The birth of the Baptist is parallel to the birth of Isaac ; that 
of the Messiah to the creation of Adam. Jesus is the second 
Adam. But once more there is no violent breach with the past 
Even in its revolutions Providence is conservative. Just as the 
Prophet who is to renovate Israel is taken from the old priesthood, 
so the Christ who is to redeem the human race is not created out 
of nothing, but " born of a woman." 

26. els ir<5Xip TTJS TaXiXaias p oVojxa Najapr. The description 
perhaps implies that Lk. is writing for those who are not familiar 
with the geography of Palestine. There is no reason for believing 
that he himself was unfamiliar with it. Comp. ver. 39, iv. 31, 
viL u, viii. 26, ix. 10, xvii. u, xix. 29, 37, 41. 

Galilu is one of many geographical names which have gradually extended 
their range. It was originally a little ** circuit" of territory round Kadesh- 
Naphtah containing the towns given by Solomon to Hiram (i Kings ix. n). 
This was called the "circuit of the Gentiles," because the inhabitants were 
strangers (i Mac. v. 15, Pa\. dXXo^tfXwv). But it grew, until in the time of 
Christ it included the territory of Naphtali, Asher, Zebulon, and Issachar 
(.J3*L p. 1117). For a description of this region see Jos. JB.J. ul 3. 1-3. 
Nazareth is mentioned neither in O.T. nor in Josephus, but it was probably 
not a new town in our Lord's time. The site is an attractive one, in a basin 
among the south ndges of Lebanon. The sheltered valley is very fruitful, and 
abounds in flowers From the hill behind the town the view over Lebanon, 
Hermon, Carmel, the Mediterranean, Gilead, Tabor, Gilboa, the plain of 
Esdraelon, and the mountains of Samaria, is very celebrated (Renan, Vie de /. 
p. 27). It would seem as if ML (u. 23) was not aware that Nazareth was the 
original home of Joseph and Mary. 

1 " It has been argued that the different modes in which God is recorded to 
have communicated with men, in St Matthew by dreams and in St. Luke by 
Angels, show the extent of the subjective influence of the writer's mind upon 
the narrative. But surely those are right who see in this difference the use of 
various means adapted to the peculiar state of the recipient. Moreover, as St. 
Matthew recognizes the ministry of Angels (xxvm 2), so St. Luke relates 
Visions (Acts x. 9-16, xvi. 9, xvm. 9, 10). ... It is to be noticed that the 
contents of the divine messages (Matt. i. 20, 21 ; Luke i. 30-33) are related 
conversely to the general character of the Gospels, as a consequence of the 
difference of character in those to whom they are addressed. The promise of 
Redemption is made to Joseph ; of a glonous Kingdom to the Virgin '* { Wsctfc 
f*t. to Gospels, p. 317, 7th ed.). 


The form of the naire of the town varies much, between Nazareth, Nazaret, 
Nazara, and Nazarath. Keim has twice contended strongly for Nazara ( /. of 
Naz. t JEng. tr. u. p. 16, iv. p. 108) ; but he has not persuaded many of the 
correctness of his conclusions. WH. consider that "the evidence when 
tabulated presents little ambiguity" (ii. App. p. 160). Nafap&e is found 
frequently (eight out of eleven tunes) m Codex A, but hardly anywhere else. 
Nafapd is used once by Mt (iv. 13), and perhaps once by Lk. (iv. 16). 
Hafapte occurs once in Mt (xxi. 11) and once in Acts (x. 38). Everywhere 
else (Mt. h. 23 ; Mk. i. 9 ; Lk. i. 26, ii. 4, 39, 51 ; Jn. L 46, 47) we have 
certainly or probably Na^ap^r. Thus Mt, uses the three possible forms 
equally ; Lk. all three with a decided preference for Nazaret ; while Mk. and 
Jn. use Nazaret e-nly. This appears to be fairly conclusive for Nazaret. Yet 
Scrivener holds that " regarding the orthography of this word no reasonable 
certainty is to be attained" (Inf. to Crit. of N.T. ii. p. 316); and Alford 
seems to be of a similar opmion (i. Prokgom. p. 97). Weiss thinks that 
Nazara may have been the original form, but that it had already become 
unusual when the Gospels were written. The modem town is called En 
Nazzrah) and is shunned by Jews. Its population of 5000 is mainly Christian, 
with a few Mahometans. 

27. IfinjorTcujA&Tji'. This is the N.T. form of the word (ii. 5) : in 
LXX we have /Ae/wi/orrcry*. (Deut xxii. 28). The interval between 
betrothal and marriage was commonly a year, during which the 
bride lived with her friends. But her property was vested in her 
future husband, and unfaithfulness on her part was punished, like 
adultery, with death (Deut xxiL 23, 24). The case of the wonian 
taken in adultery was probably a case of this kind. 

eg OLKOU Aauei'S. It is unnecessary, and indeed impossible, to 
decide whether these words go with avSpt, or with irapflcvov, or 
with both. The last is the least probable, but Chrysostom and 
Wieseler support it From w. 32 and 69 we may with probability 
infer that Lk. regards Mary as descended from David In ii. 4 he 
states this of Joseph. Independently of the present verse, therefore, 
we may infer that, just as John was of priestly descent both by 
Zacharias and Elisabeth, so Jesus was of royal descent both by 
Mary and Joseph. The title "Son of David" was publicly given 
to Jesus and never disputed (Mt L i, ix. 27, xii. 23, xv. 22, 
xx. 30, 31 ; Mk. x. 47, 48 ; Lk. xviii. 38, 39). In the Test. XIL 
Pair. Christ is said to be descended from Lm and Judah 
(Simeon vii.); and the same idea is found in a fragment of 
Irenseus (Frag, xvii., Stieren, p. 836). It was no doubt based, 
as Schleiermacher bases it (St. Luke, Eng. tr. p. 28), on the fact 
that Elisabeth, who was of Levi, was related to Mary (see on 
ver. 36). The repetition involved in nffs irapfleVoii is in favour of 
taking e| ofcov AavetS with avSpl: otherwise we should have ex- 
pected avTijs. But this is not conclusive. 

28. Xotpe, Kcxapirofj^iT). 1 Note the alliteration and the con- 

1 The Ave Mana as a liturgical address to the Virgin consists of three 
parts, two of which are scriptural and one not. The first two parts, " Hail, 
Mary, Bill of grace : the Ixord is witfr thee," and " Blessed art thou among 


nerion between x^P and X*P 1 *' J^ e gmti* pkna of the Vulg. 
is too indefinite. It is right, if it means " fall of grace, which 
thou hast received*} wrong, if it means "full of grace, which 
thou hast to bestow* From Eph. i. 6 and the analogy of verbs 
in -ow, KcxapiT<i>p,W) must mean "endued with grace" fEcclus. 
rviii 17). Non ut mater gratia, sed ut filia gratisi (Beng.). 
What follows explains /eexapiToywVi?, for with /i-cra crov we under- 
stand m, not <TTO> (comp. Judg. vi. 12). It is because the Lord 
is with her that she is endued with grace. Tyn., Cov., and Cran., 
no less than Wic. and Rhem., have " full of grace 
"freely beloved' 1 

The familiar riXoyiuubq OT> & ywaitv, although well attested ( A C D X 
PAH, Latt Syrr. Aeth. Goth., Tert. Eus.), probably is an interpolation 
borrowed from ver. 42 : tf B L, Aegyptt. Ann. omit 

S9. Here also Idovcra, (A), for which some Latin texts have cum audisset^ 
is an interpolation borrowed perhaps from ver. 12. It is not stated that Mary 
saw Gabnel. The pronominal use of the article (^ W) is rare in N.T. 
(Acts L 6 ; Mt ii. 5, 9). It is confined to phrases with tfv and 94 9 and 
mostly to nom. masc. and fern. 

Here only in N.T. It is stronger than 
in ver. 12. Neither Zacharias nor Mary are accustomed to 
visions or voices: they are troubled by them. There is no 
evidence of hysterical excitement or hallucination in either case. 
The StcXoyiJcTo, "reckoned up different reasons," is in itself 
against this. The verb is confined to the Synoptic Gospels 
(v. 21, 22 ; Mk. ii. 6, 8) : Jn. xi. 50 the true reading is Aoy#>cr0e. 
iroTairfo In N.T. this adj. never has the local signification, 
"from what country or nation?" cujasl (Aesch. Cho. 575 ; Soph. 
0.C. 1160). It is synonymous with irotos, a use which is found in 
Demosthenes ; and it always implies astonishment, with or without 
admiration (vii. 39 ; Mt viii. 27 ; ML xiii. i ; 2 Pet iii. ii ; i Jn. 
iii. i). In LXX it does not occur. The original form is TroSawds, 
and may come from irov euro ; but -oWo? is perhaps a mere ter- 

cttj. It is only in Lk. in N.T. that we find the opt in indirect questions. 
In him it is freq. both without &v (iii. 15, viii. 9, xxii. 23; Actsxvii. n, 
xsl 33, xxv. 20) and with &y (vi ii ; Acts v. 24, x. 17). In Acts viii. 31 we 
have opt with to in a direct question. Simcox, Lang, of N.T. p. 112; 
Win. xli. 4. c, p. 374. 

30. M?) 4opou, Mapirfjx, cupes y&p yf,$w irapfc TW Gew. See OH 

women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb" (ver, 42), are first found in the 
Liber Anttphonianus attributed to Gregory the Great ; and they were authorized 
as a formula to be taught with the Creed and the Lord's Prayer, c. A.D. 1198. 
The third part, " Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners now and at 
the hour of death," was added in the fifteenth century, and was authorized by 
Pope Pius v. in 1568. 


ver. 13. The ?pe5 \apiy v. r. 0. explains /cr^mo/zcn;. The phrase 
is Hebraic: No>c eBpev \apiv evavriov Ku/n'ov rov <8)eo8 (Gen. VL 8; 
comp. xviii. 3, xxxix. 4). See on iv. 22. 

For the word see on ver. 24, and for the form comp. !L 21, 
anc. 47 ; Acts i. 8, ii. 38, mil. 27 ; Jn. v. 43, xvi. 14, 15, 34. In ionic we 
have fat Mpfo/uu. Veitch, p. 359; Win. v. 4. f, p. 54. 

iv ycurrpl ical Wjfl ul<5i>, ical KaX&rci? TO ofojj,a. The same word- 
ing is found Gen. xvL 16 of Ishmael, and Is. vii. 14 of ImmanueL 
Comp. Gen. xvii. 19 of Isaac, and Mt L 21 of Jesus. In all cases 
the KoXeo-eis is not a continuation of the prophecy, but a command, 
as in most of the Ten Commandments (Mt v. 21, 27, 33; comp. 
Lk. iv. 12; Acts xxiii. 5, etc.). Win. xliii. 5. c, p. 396. The 
name 'fyo-ovs was revealed independently to Joseph also (Mt i 21). 
It appears in the various forms of Oshea, Hoshea, Jehoshua, 
Joshua, Jeshua, and Jesus. Its meaning is "Jehovah is help," 01 
" God the Saviour." See Pearson, On the Creed* art ii sut init. 
p. 131, ed. 1849. 

32. OUTOS ecrrcu jifyas. As in ver. 15, this is forthwith ex- 
plained ; and the greatness of Jesus is very different from the 
greatness of John. The title ul&s *Ytyiorou expresses some very 
close relation between Jesus and Jehovah, but not the Divine Son- 
ship in the Trinity; comp. vL 33.' On the same principle as fe 
and Kvpios, "Y^icrros is anarthrous : there can be only one Highest 
(Ecclus. viL 15, xvii. 26, xix. 17, xxiv. 2, 23, xxix. u, etc.). The 
K\t]0TJo-T<u is not a mere substitute for rr<u : He not only shall be 
the Son of God, but shall be recognised as such. In the ActiPauli 
et TheclsR we have Majcaptoi ot cro<iav AajSowcs 'Irjarov Xpwrrov, or* 
avrol viol {tyrtorov fcA^'owrai (Tischendorf, p. 239). For T&K 6p<W 
AaueiS comp. 2 Sam. vii 12, 13 ; Is. ix. 6, 7, xvi 5. 

AauetS TOU irarp^s auroG. This is thought to imply the Davidic 
descent of Mary ; but the inference is not quite certain. Jesus 
was the heir of Joseph, as both genealogies imply. Comp. Ps. 
cxxxii. ii ; Hos. iii. 14. There is abundant evidence of the belief 
that the Messiah would spring from David : Mk. xiL 35, x. 47, 
xi. 10 ; Lk. xviii. 38, xx. 41 ; 4 Ezra xii. 32 (Syr. Arab. Arm.) ; -ft. 
SoL xvii. 23, 24 ; Talmud and Targums. See on Rom. L 3. 

33. pao-iXeucrei . . . els rods aidcas. Comp. " But of the Son 
he saith, God is Thy throne for ever and ever* (Heb. i 6, where 
see Wsctt.); also Dan. ii. 44, viL 14; Jn. xu.34; Rev. XL 15. 
The eternity of Christ's kingdom is assured by the fact that it is to 
be absorbed in the kingdom of the Father (i Cor. xv. 24-28), 
These magnificent promises could hardly have been invented by a 
writer who was a witness of the condition of the Jews during the 
half century which followed the destruction of Jerusalem. Indeed* 
we may perhaps go further and say that "it breathes the spirit of 


the Messianic hope before it had received the rude and crushing 
blow in the rejection of the Messiah" (Gore, Dissertations^ p. 16). 
Comp. w. 17, 54, 55, 68-71, iL 38. 

The constr. <Wi\ei5ew M f. ace. is not classical We have it again 
rix. 14, 27. 

34. rifts carat TOUTO. She does not ask for proof > as Zacharias 
did (ver. 18) ; and only in the form of the words does she ask as to 
the mode of accomplishment. Her utterance is little more than 
an involuntary expression of amazement : non dubitantis sed admir- 
antis (Grotius). In contrasting her with Zacharias, Ambrose says, 
Htec jam de negotio tractat ; ilk adhue de nuntio dubitat. It is 
clear that she does not doubt the fact promised, nor for a moment 
suppose that her child is to be the child of Joseph. 

eTrci aySpa ofi yiKoScrKw. Comp. Gen. xix. 8; Judg. xi. 39; 
Num. xxxL 17. The words are the avowal of a maiden conscious 
of her own purity ; and they are drawn from her by the strange 
declaration that she is to have a son before she is married. It is 
very unnatural to understand the words as a vow of perpetual 
virginity, or as stating that such a vow has already been taken, or 
is about to be taken. It is difficult to reconcile owe cytvwo-Kcv (im- 
perf., not aor.) avn)v Icos (Mt i. 25) with any such vow. 1 

35. I>eujma cfyioy eircXedaerai em cr It may be doubted whether 
the article is omitted " because Holy Spirit is here a proper name " ; 
rather because it is regarded impersonally as the creative power of 
God. Comp. KCLI urev/wx cot) re<epero eirdvto TOvvSaros (Gen. L 2) : 
che two passages are very parallel. See on ver. 15. Both urdJ/Mi 
and aytov have special point. It is spirit and not flesh, what is 
holy and not what is sinful, that is to produce this effect in her. 
With CT-cXeuWai eirl ere comp. Acts i. 3. Excepting Eph. ii. 7 and 
Jas. v. i, the verb is peculiar to LL (xi. 22, xxi, 26; Acts i, 8, 
viiL 24, xiii. 40, xiv. 19). 

Surajus Vijnorou iirt<rKi((ri croi. For SiWfus see on iv. 14 ; for 
eirwrkiacrei comp. the account of the Transfiguration (ix. 34), and 
for the dat comp. the account of Peter's shadow (Acts v. 15). It 
is the idea of the Shechinah which is suggested here (Exod. xL 38). 
The cloud of glory signified the Divine presence and power, and it 
is under such influence that Mary is to become a mother. 

8i<5. This illative particle is rare in the Gospels (vii, 7 ; Mt xxvii. 8) f 
not in Mk, or Jn. 

rS yevv&pevov Syiov KXtj^o-eTai uws Oeoo. " The holy thing which 
shall be born shall be called the Son of God," or, "That which 

1 H. Lasserre renders putsque je n'at nul rapport auce mon mart t and ex- 
that &VTJ signifie man, epoux ; et la phrase marqite 
'Je fait par Marie (pp. 265, 564, ed. 1887). It is imr 
; either article or possessive pronoun, can mean " my 1 


shall be born shall be called holy, the Son of God.** The latter ol 
these two renderings seems to be preferable. Comp. <5yiovT<5 icvpuf 
K\ i rjd'qo'Tai (ii. 22); Nacopcuos /eX^^ercTCU (Mt. ii. 23); viol eov 

(v. 9); IXa^wrros KX^^crerat and /*eya /cX. (v. 19). In 
all cases the appellation precedes the verb. The unborn child is 
called ayiov as being free from all taint of sin. De hoc Sancto idem 
angelus est locutus, Dan. ix. 24 (Beng.). The IK o-ov, which many 
authorities insert after ycwayio'ov, is probably an ancient gloss, de- 
rived perhaps from Mt i. 16 : A B C 3 D and most versions omit 

The title "Son of God," like "Son of Man," was a recognized 
designation of the Messiah. In Enoch^ and often in 4 Ezra, the 
Almighty speaks of the Messiah as His Son. Christ seldom used 
it of Himself (Mt. xxvii. 43 ; Jn. x. 36). But we have it in the 
voice from heaven (iii. 22, ix. 35); in Peter's confession (Mt 
xvi. 1 6) ; in the centurion's exclamation (Mk. xv. 39) ; in the devil's 
challenge (iv. 3, 9); in the cries of demoniacs (Mk. iii. ii, v. 7). 
Very early the Christian Church chose it as a concise statement of 
the divine nature of Christ See on Rom. L 4, and Swete, Afost. 
Creed, p. 24. For Syiov see on Rom. L 7. The radical meaning 
is " set apart for God, consecrated." 

36. Kal 1806 'E\icr<pT ifj o-uyyms crou. Comp. ver. 20. Mary, 
who did not ask for one, receives a more gracious sign than 
Zacharias, who demanded it The relationship between her and 
Elisabeth is unknown. 

" Cousin," started by Wiclif, and continued until RV. substituted "kins- 
woman," has now become too definite in meaning. The kinship has led 
artists to represent the two children as being playmates ; but Jn. i. 31 seems 
to be against such companionship. It has also led to the conjecture that 
Jesus was descended from both Levi and Judah (see on ver. 27). But Levites 
might marry with other tribes ; and therefore Elisabeth, who was descended 
from Aaron, might easily be related to one who was descended from David. 
This verse is not evidence that Mary was not of the house of David. 

The late form wyyevls (comp. evywk), and the Ion. dat. ytfpei for y/ipq, 
(Gen. xv. 15, xxi. 7, xxv. 8), should be noticed ; also that oCroj being the 
subject, the noun has no article. Comp. xxL 22. The combination xai 
oCros is peculiar to Lk. (viii, 41 ?, rvi i, rx. 28). The relative ages of Jesus 
and of John are fixed by this statement. 

We may take KaXovpfro as imperf. part., " Used to be called.** This 
reproach would cease when she reappeared at the end of the five months 
(ver. 24). Ka\o6fj,vos with appellations is freq. in Lk. 

37. OUK dSufaT^rei irap& TOO 0eou ira? ftfjfia. The negative and 
the verb are to be closely combined and taken as the predicate of 
trav p^/xa. We must not take OVK with irav. This is plain from 
Gen. xviii, 14 : fny dSwarct vapa r$ ea> irav pyfia 3 " Hath God 
said, and can He not do it?" *. Is anything which God has pro- 
mised impossible ? RV. here has " be void of power " for dSwaiw ; 
but it is doubtful whether the verb ever has this signification. Of 
things, it means " to be impossible " (Mt xviL 20); and of person^ 


" to be unable " ; in which case, like Swarew (Rom. xiv. 4 ; 2 Cor. 
ix 8), it is followed by the infin. That "be impossible" is the 
meaning, both here and Gen. xviii. 14, is probable from Job xlii. 2, 
oTSa ori Travra Swacrat, dSuvarct SI <roi avOw ; and from Zech. viii. 6, 
where dSwaroJo-ct is used of a thing being too hard for man but not 
too hard for God; and from Jer. xxxii. 17, where both Aquila and 
Symmachus have ov/c dSwcmyo-ci for o$ ^ airoKpv/5y of LXX. We 
render, therefore, " From God no word shall be impossible." The 
idiom ov - . . Tras, in the sense of "all ... not," /.*. "none," is 
probably Hebraic. Comp. Mt xxiv. 22. It is less common in 
N.T. than in LXX (Exod. xii. 16, 44, xx. 16; Dan. ii. 10, etc.), 
Win xxvi. i, p. 214. 

38. 'l8ou ^ 8ou%] Kupiou. That Bov is not a verb, but an 
exclamation, is manifest from the verbless nominative which follows 
it. Comp. v. 12, 1 8. "Handmaid" or "servant" is hardly 
adequate to SovXoy. It is rather " bondmaid " or " slave." In an 
age m which almost all servants were slaves, the idea which is 
represented by our word " servant " could scarcely arise. In N.T. 
the fern. 8ovX.y occurs only here, ver. 48, and Acts iL 18, the last 
being a quotation. 

yeVoiTo jutot Karoi TO prjfid <rou. This is neither a prayer that 
what has been foretold may take place, nor an expression of joy at 
the prospect. Rather it is an expression of submission^ " God's 
will be done": irtva^ dpi ypa^o^evos* o fiovXerat 6 ypa^eu?, 
ypa$era> (Eus.). Mary must have known how her social position 
and her relations with Joseph would be affected by her being with 
child before her marriage. There are some who maintain that the 
revelation made to Joseph (Mt i. 18-23) is inconsistent with what 
Lk. records here ; for would not Mary have told him of the angelic 
message ? We may reasonably answer that she would not do so. 
Her own inclination would be towards reserve (ii. 51); and what 
likelihood was there that he would believe so amazing a story? 
She would prefer to leave the issue with regard to Joseph in God's 

dirqXOeK &ir* aurfjs 6 ayycXos. Ut peracta kgationt* Comp, 
Acts xii. 10 ; Judg. vi. 21. 

On the whole of this exquisite narrative Godet justly remarks : " Quell* 
dignitt, qtulle puret^ qu&lk simplicity quelle dehcatessc dans tout ee dialogue I 
Pas un mot de trop^ pas un de trap peu. Une telU narration rfapu tmanerqu* 
dt la sphere sainte dans laquelle lefatt lui-mtme avait eu heu" (i. p. 128, 3&me 
ed. 1888). Contrast the attempts in the apocryphal gospels, the wnters of 
which had our Gospels to imitate, and yet committed such gross offences against 
taste, decency, and even morality. What would their inventions have been if 
they had had no historical Gospels to guide them ? 

Dr. Swete has shown that the doctrine of the Miraculous Conception 
was from the earliest times part of the Creed. Beginning with Justin 
Martyt (Apol. i 21, 31, 32, 33, 63 ; Try. 23, 48, zoo), he traces back 


through Aristides (J. R. Harris, p. 24 ; Hennecke, jp. 9 ; Barnes, Canon and 
Uncanon. Gospp. p. 13), Ignatius (Eph. xix. ; Trail, ix. ; Smyr. i.), the 
Valentinians, and Basihdes, to S. Luke, to whom these Gnostics appealed. 
The silence of S. Mark is of no weight ; his record does not profess to go 
farther back than the ministry of the Baptist. In the Third Gospel we reach 
not merely the date of the Gospel (A.D. 75-80), but the date of the early 
traditions incorporated in these first chapters, traditions preserved (possibly 
in writing) at Jerusalem, and derived from Mary herself. 

The testimony of the First Gospel is perhaps even earlier in origin, and is 
certainly independent It probably originated with Joseph, as the other with 
Mary (Gore, Bampton Lectures^ p. 78 ; Dissertations on Subjects connected 
with the Incarnation^ pp. 12-40). Greatly as the two narratives differ, both 
bear witness to the virgin birth (Swetc, The Apostle? Creed, ch. iv.). 

89-56. The Visit of the Mother of the Samouf to the Mother 
of the Forerunner. 

This narrative grows naturally out of the two which precede it 
in this group. The two women, who through Divine interposition 
are about to become mothers, meet and confer with one another. 
Not that a desire to talk about her marvellous experience prompts 
Mary to go, but because the Angel had suggested it (ver. 36). 
That Joseph's intention of putting her away caused the journey, is 
an unnecessary conjecture. 

It is not easy to see why the Song of Elisabeth is not given in metrical 
form either in WH. or hi RV. It seems to have the characteristics of Hebrew 
poetry in a marked degree, if not in so mil a manner as the Magnificat^ 
Benedict, and Nunc Dimittis. It consists of two strophes of four lines 

Kal etiKoyijfUvos o Kapiros TTJS /cotXfat (TON. 


If a X0p 4 P'fy rr lP T v Kvplov fwv rpbs tfd ; 

Moi) y&p cui tyfrero ^ 0av^ roO dcnrflur/tov <rov els TO. Mi fu> v > 

ml fjuucapta T\ vurrefoaffa STL t<rru TcXclwtt 
rots XaX^/i^i'Ois afrry 

On all four songs see a paper on " Messianic Psalms of the N.T.," ty 
B. B. Warfield, Expositor^ 3rd series, ii. pp. 301, 321 ff. 

39. 'Amoroora. A very favourite word with Lk., who has it 
about sixty times against about twenty-two times in the rest of 
N.T. It occurs hundreds of times in LXX. Of preparation for 
a journey it is specially common (xv. 18, 20; Acts x. 20, xxii. 10, 
etc.). Lk. is also fond of such phrases as Iv TOIS tjfxp<u$ ToJrois, 
or & TOLLS ypepats nvos (ver. 5, ii. i, iv. 2, 25, v. 35, vi. 12, ix. 36, 
etc.; Acts i. 15, ii. 18, v. 37, vi. i, viL 41, etc.). They are not 
found in Jn., and occur only four times in Mt, and the same in Mk 
Here "in those days" means soon after the Annunciation. As 


the projected journey was one of several days, it would require time 
to arrange it and find an escort See small print note on ver. 20. 

liropeu0T) cts iV ty"^- There is no trace of 'Qpewrj as a 
proper name ; fj opwq means the mountainous part of Judah as 
distinct from the plain (ver. 65 ; Gen. xiv. 10 j Num. xiiL 29 ; 
Josh. ix. i, x. 40; comp. Judith L 6, ii. 22, iv. 7). It is worth 
noting that in this narrative, which is from an independent source, 
Lk. twice uses 07 opwrj. Elsewhere, when he is on the same ground 
as Mt and Mk., he uses, as they do, TO ooos (vi. 12, viii. 32, ix. 
28, 37). None of them use either opos or ra opy. Lft On a Fresh 
Revision ofJV.T. pp. 124, 186, 3rd ed. 1891. For the shortening of 
opeiv?? to opwri see WH. ii. App. p. 154. Grotius rightly remarks on 
jjLCTct <nrou8fjs, ne negligent signum quod augends ipsius fiduci& Deus 
assignaverat. Comp. Mk. vi. 25 ; Exod. xii. n ; Wisd. xix, 2. 

ets irtSXii' 'lou'Sa. Lk does not give the name, probably because 
he did not know it It may have been Hebron, just as it may 
have been any town in the mountainous part of Judah, and Hebron 
was chief among the cities allotted to the priests. But if Lk. had 
meant Hebron, he would either have named it or have written ryv 
TroXiv in the sense of the chief priestly dwelling. But it is very 
doubtful whether the arrangement by which certain cities were 
allotted to the priests was carried into effect; and, if so, whether 
it continued. Certainly priests often lived elsewhere. Eli lived 
at Shiloh, Samuel at Ramathaim-Zophim, Mattathias at Modin. 
None of these had been allotted to the priests. See on ver. 23. 

That 'lozJfa is the name of the town, and represents Juttah ('Irdv or 'lerni 
or Tcwtf), which was in the mountain region of Judah (Josh. xv. 55), and had 
been allotted to the priests (Josh. xxi. 16), is possible. Reland (1714) was 
perhaps the first to advocate this. Robinson found a village called Yvttah in 
that region (Res. in Pal. 11. p. 206), and the identification is attractive. But 
the best authorities seem to regard it as precarious. A tradition, earlier than 
the Crusades, makes Ain Kanm tc be the birthplace of John the Baptist 
Didon (Jlstts Chnst, App. D) contends for this, appealing to V. Gue'rin, 
Description de la Pakstzw, i. p. 83, and Fr. LieVin, Guide dt la Palestine^ ii. 
But it is best to regard the place as an unknown town of Judah. In any case, 
the spelling "Juda" (AV.) is indefensible; comp. iu. 33. 

41. ey^ero . . * eo-Kipnrjo-ci/. See detached note at the end of 
the chapter. It is improbable that in her salutation Mary told 
Elisabeth of the angelic visit The salutation caused the move- 
ment of the unborn child, and Elisabeth is inspired to interpret 
this sign aright. Grotius states that the verb is a medical word for 
the movement of children in the womb, but he gives no instances. 
It is used Gen. xxv. 22 of the unborn Esau and Jacob, and Ps. 
cxiii. 4, 6 of the mountains skipping like rams. In class. Grk. it is 
used of the skipping both of animals and of men. For ^irX^o-On 
Tiycu'jjiaTos dyk" see on ver - I 5- k = " when " is very freq. in Lk. 

42. a,ve$4rr)<rev. I Chron. xv. 28, xvi. 4, 5, 42 3 2 Chron* 


v, 13; here only in N.T. Lk. frequently records strong expres- 
sions of emotion, adding /Jteyd^t] to Kpauy^, <f>wq, X a P^ e * c (& IO > 
iv. 33, viii. 28, xvii. 15, xix. 37, xxiii. 23, 46, xxiv. 52). It is 
perhaps because Kpavyy seemed less appropriate to express a cry of 
joy^ that it has been altered (A C D) to the more usual favq. But 
it is convincingly attested (N B L B). It means any cry of strong 
feeling, whether surprise (ML xxv. 6), anger (Eph. iv. 31), or 
distress (Heb. v. 7). 

EuXoyi(]|x&ij <rO iv yvvaifa. A Hebraistic periphrasis for the 
superlative, "Among women thou art the one who is specially 
blessed." Mary has a claim to this title /car 1 e^o^v. Comp. 
vii. 28. Somewhat similar expressions occur in class. Grk., esp. in 
poetry : 5 <i'A.a ywat/cwv (Eur. Ale. 460); 5> cr^srXi dvSpwv (Aristoph. 
Ran. 1048). In N.T. vAoyi7ju,ei/os is used of men, cvXoyijTos of 
God : see on ver. 68. With euXoytifi^os 6 icapiros TYJS icotXias aou 
comp. c^Xoy^A/a ra e/eyova riys /t. crov (Deut xxviiL 4) and Kapirw 
KoiAias (Gen. xxx. 2 j Lam. ii. 20). See small print on ver. 15. 

43. K<X! ir6Bv fjioi TOUTO. We understand yeyovo/ : comp. Mk. 
xiL 37. Modesties filii pr&ludens qui olim Christo erat dicturus^ cru 
*PXQ ^po* f L ' (Grotius). It is by inspiration (ver. 41) that Elisabeth 
knows that she who greets her is 17 MTTJP rov JCU/H'OV, ie. of the 
Messiah (Ps. ex. i). The expression "Mother of God" is not 
found in Scripture. 1 

In tva, 2X00 we have a weakening of the original force of fra, which begins 
with the Alexandrine writers as an alternative for the infinitive, and has 
become universal in modern Greek. Godet would keep the tehc force by 
arbitrarily substituting "What have I done?" for "Whence is this to me?* 1 
"What have I done in order that?" etc. Comp. the Lucan constr., TOVTO 
5ri (x. II, xii, 39; Acts xxiv. 14). 

44. 9 l8o& y^P &S CY^CTO TJ cjxa^ TOU d<nracr(j,ou irou. On this 
yap Bengel bases the strange notion that the conception of the 
Christ takes place at the salutation : ydp rationem experimens^ cut 
hoc if so temporis puncto Etisabet primum " Matrem Domini sui n 
proclamet Mariam. . . . Nunc Dominus^ et respectu matris et 
progenitorum^ et respectu locorum^ ubi conceptus s&que ac natus est> 
exjuda est ortus. It is a mark of the delicacy and dignity of the, 
narrative that the time is not stated ; but ver. 38 is more probable 
than ver. 40. Excepting 2 Cor. vii. n, iSov yap is peculiar to Lk. 
(ver. 48, ii, 10, vi. 23, xviL 21; Acts ix. n). For ey^/cro ^ <J>wi/i$ 
see on iii. 22 and 36. 

45, fxaicapia ^ morcuo-aaa OTI. Latin texts, both of Lat Vet 
and of Vulg., vary much between beata qu credidit quoniam and 
beata qu& credidish quoniam. English Versions are equally varied, 
even Wic. and Rhem. being different "Blessed is she that 

1 P. Didon inaccurately renders this, Comment st jaii-il $*$ k, f*vrv de me* 
Die* viennt & moi (p. TTI% 


believed" is probably right This is the first beatitude in the 
Gospel; and it is also the last: /wtfcaptot ot w iSovres KOL irwrrerf- 
<ravrs (Jn. xx. 29). In Mk. /xoicaptos does not occur; and in 
Jn. only xiii. 17 and xx. 29. It is specially common in Lk 

This verse 5s one of many places in N.T. in which 5rt may be eithe r " that * 
or *' because" t see on vu. 16. There can be little doubt that Luther, Erasmus, 
Beza, and all Latin and English Versions are right in taking the latter sense here. 
The #n introduces the reason why the belief is blessed and not the contents (Syr. 
gin.) of the belief. There is no need to state what Mary believed. Elisabeth 
adds her faith to Mary's, and declares that, amazing as the promise is, it will 
assuredly be fulfilled. Only a small portion of what had been promised (31-33) 
nad as yet been accomplished ; and hence the ftrrai rcXctaxris, " There shall 
be a bringing to perfection, an accomplishment" (Heb. vii. n). Comp. 4geXetf- 
ffofuu ck T\ciwffiv TWV \6yw &r AoX^trare fur 9 ipov (Judith z. 9). 

46-56. The Magnificat or Song of Mary. 

This beautiful lyric is neither a reply to Elisabeth nor an 
address to God. It is rather a meditation ; an expression of per- 
sonal emotions and experiences. It is more calm and majestic 
than the utterance of Elisabeth, The exultation is as great, but it 
is more under control The introductory clirev, as contrasted with 
dv<o>v77crv *pa.vyfj fieyaXy (ver. 42), points to this. The hymn is 
modelled upon the O.T. Psalms, especially the Song of Hannah 
(i Sam. iL i-io) ; but its superiority to the latter in moral and 
spiritual elevation is very manifest From childhood the Jews 
knew many of the O.T. lyrics by heart ; and, just as our own poor, 
who know no literature but the Bible, easily fall into biblical 
language in times of special joy or sorrow, so Mary would naturally 
fall back on the familiar expressions of Jewish Scripture in this 
moment of intense exultation. The exact relation between her 
hymn and these familiar expressions can be best seen when the 
two are placed side by side in a table. 


MeyoXfret 4 t^xt f* v *&* **?/** 
KO! ^yoXX&ww rd TieO/i jwv ty60ij jclpat ftow 

M r$ <r<ori)pl fimr if Bet} fMV. 

&n Matter M i> rax bow &, ta/SXArw 

Ha/cap/a #y<&, 
fjuucaptovo-tv fte va<Tcu at yeveaL 

r6 6vopa avrov, 
*td rk ^Xeoj a&rov els yevc&s Ktd yevcd9 ri 91 Aeoj row wplov fab roO alarm 

Kal ?ws TOV aluvos 
rott fapo 

1 1 Sain. ii. I. i Sam. in. * Gen. xzz. 13. 

4 Deut. x. 21. Ps. cxi. 9. 6 Ps. ciiL 17. 


' Kpdros 4v ppaxton aflrofl 1 * <rb iraireiv&ffat fa rpai/MTfaw forep 

ews <ro* 

Stavola KapSlas a^rwr. &eo-:6/>7ri<ras robs fyOpofa <ro* 

ffcrfftXf? dwdaras dird ftpbvuv * ^airoar&Xwj' ZepeTs aJx^taXwrovy 

/col tyuacv raveivofo, dvvd<rras 8 yys KartaTpe^ev, 

veivwrrcu tvbr\ii<rev dyaOQv * rkv voiowra ra.V6t.vobs els ti\f>ot t 

rXovrowrat <aT&rreiXei' /cepofo Kai ebroXwX&raj geyelpovra. 

4 Ktfptor TTx/ei /cat rXour/fet 

roiretyot irai &v\nf/ot 
^vx-Jj? vctvGffar fyhrXya-ev &ya$tar. 
ra /w>u, off dpreXa- 

rartyas %p&v 

T$ 'Afipadfj., xdOon &fuxras rut 
r euUDrcu Tarp&criv ijfuav )cari rij ^^pat rdr 

9 ry Aavei5 Acai ry ffrp/Mn afrrov teas 

The hymn Ms into four strophes, 46-48, 49 and 50, 51-53, 
54 and 55.! 

46. MeyaXifoei 4 ^"X 1 ! P- ou ^ tP loIf * The verb is used in the 
literal sense of " enlarge," Mt. xsdii. 5 : comp. Lk. i. 58. More often, 
as here, in the derived sense of " esteem great, extol, magnify " 
(Acts v. 13, x 46, xix. 17). So also in class. Grk. Weiss goes 
too far when he contends that "distinctions drawn between 
^vx 1 ? ^d irvevpa have absolutely no foundation in N.T. usage " 
(sind gdnzlich unbegrundei) ; but it is evident that no distinction 
is to be made here. The i^vx 7 ? an( i ^ e w<fj,a, are the immaterial 
part of man's nature as opposed to the body or the flesh. It is in 
her inner, higher life, in her real self, that Mary blesses God in 
jubilation. If a distinction were made here, we ought to have 
/uteyoAum TO irvcv/xa pov and ^yoAAiao-ev ^ ^X 1 ? T* 01 '* ^ or ^ e irvevfta 
is the seat of the religious life, the \lruxn of the emotions. See Lft. 
Notes on the Epp. of S. Paul, p. 88, 1895, and the literature there 
quoted, esp. Olshausen, Opusc. p. 157. 

47. VJYoXXCao-cF. A word formed by Hellenists from iyd\\ofuu, and 
freq. in LXX (Ps. xv. 9, xlvii. 12, box. 5 ; Is. xxxv. 2; Jer. xlix. 4). The 
act is rare ; perhaps only here and Rev. xjx. 7 ; but as v.l. i Pet. i. 8. The 
or. may refer to the occasion of the angelic visit But it is the Greek idiom 
to use the aor. in many cases in which we use the peri, and then it is mis- 
leading to translate the Grk. aor. by the Eng. aor. Moreover, in late Grk. 

1 Ps. boodx. ii. * Job xiL 19. Job v. II. 

*iSam.iu7. * Ps. cviL 9. Is. xli. 8. 

f Ps. xcvui. 3. 8 Mic. vii. 20. f a Sam. xxii. 51. 

10 On the structure of Hebrew poetry, see Driver, Literature of the O.T* 
PP- 338-345, T. & T. Clark, 1891. 

On tke use of the Magnificat^ first at Lauds in the Galilean Church, from 
A.D. 507, and then at Vespers on Saturday in the Saxum Breviary, see Blunt, 
Annotated Prayer-Book. 


the distinction between aor. and perf. had become less sharp. Siracox, 
Lang. ofN.T. pp. 103-106. 

T<3 0e$ T aomjpi P.OU. He is the Saviour of Mary as well as 
of her fellows. She probably included the notion of external and 
political deliverance, but not to the exclusion of spiritual salvation. 
For the expression comp. i Tim. i. i, ii. 3 ; Tit i. 3, ii. 10, iii. 4; 
Jude 25; Ps. xxiii. 5, cvi. 21. In the^-ft. Sol. we have 'AA^ffea 
ra>v SucauDV irapa <H)eot; a-ayrijpos avr&v (iii. 7) ; and ^ftcts S eAirioi>/xV 
carl cov TOV <rom}pa i)/wov (xvii. 3). Comp. Ps. Sol. viii. 39, xvi. 4. 

48. STI lirj3X.e\|fev iirl T?JI> Taireti'wo-iK -rijs Sou'Xiqs aurou. Comp. 
Hannah's prayer for a child i Sam. i. 1 1. In spite of her humble 
position as a carpenter's bride, Mary had been chosen for the 
highest honour that a human being could receive. For raTrcwoo-is 
comp. Acts viiL 33 (from Is. liii. 8) and Phil. iiL 21 ; and for iSet* 
rvjv rcnrcLVtocrw comp. 2 Kings xiv. 26 and Ps. xxv. 18. This use 
of ri/?A.7Tv lift is freq. in LXX (Ps. xxv. 16, Ixix. 16, ciL 19, 
cxix. 132, etc.); see esp. i Sam. ix. 16. 

IBou yap dir& roO vuv jxaKapiouo-if ji iraaai at yeveai. For ISoo 
ydp see on ver. 42, and for diro TOU vuv see on v. 10. Elisabeth 
had begun this jjuiKapilfcv, and we have another instance in the 
woman from the crowd (xi. 27). Note the wide difference between 
the scope of Mary's prophecy, paKaptovo-iv iraxrat, al yevecu, and 
Leah's statement of fact, fiaKap^ova-iv fie vacrat, al ywaiK&s (Gen 
xxx. 13). 

The Latin renderings of d*4 rov rvr are interesting: ex hoc 
a modo (d), a nunc (Cod. Gall.)* 

49. on i-Troiiqo-^ JJLOI ^-yd\a 6 Words. Here the second stropha 
begins. The reading /AeyoXeia may come from Acts ii. 1 1 : comp. 
a eTTOMjo-as /icyaXeta (Ps. Ixx. 19). With 6 Swaros comp. 8wa/4 
"Yi/rurrov (ver. 35) and KV/HOS /cparatos icai Swaros (Ps. xxiii. 8). In 
LXX Swaro? is very common, but almost invariably of men. After 
both Swaros and avrov we should place a colon. The clause KO.I 
oytov TO wopa avrov is a separate sentence, neither dependent upon 
the preceding on, nor very closely connected with what follows. 

50. fcal TO eXeos aurou els yc^eas Kal ye^cds ToTs <f>opou/jL^ots 
auTOK. Comp. Ps. Sol. X. 4, *cat TO IX09 Kvptov rl TOVS aycwraivras 
avrov ^v dA-oy^eta, Kat /iv^o^Tjo-erai Kvptos TWV SovXtov avrov Iv eXefit; 
also xili. II, 7rt Se TOUS 6o-iow TO eAeos KvpioVj Kal ITT! Tois ^oftovfJt.e' 
yovs avrov TO cA-cos aurov. With ts ycvca? /c. y. comp. ts yevcas 
yvaiv (Is. xxxiv. 17), ts ycveav icat yvav (Ps. Ixxxix. 2), and Kara 
yevcav /cat ycveav (i Mac. ii. 61). "Fearing God" is the O.T 
description of piety. Nearly the whole verse comes from Ps. 
oil 17. 

61* 'EiroCijcrcv Kpdros Iv fipaxCovt a^rov, Sieo-K^parurcv, ic.rJL Begin- 
ning of the third strophe. The six aorists in it are variously explained. 


i. They tell of things which the Divine power and holiness and mercy 
(w. 49, 50) have already accomplished in the past. 2. According to the 
common prophetic usage, they speak of the future as already past, and tell of 
the effects to be produced by the Messiah as if they had been produced. 
3. They are gnomic, and express God's normal acts. We may set aside this 
last. It is very doubtful whether the aor. is ever used of what is normal or 
habitual (Win. xl. 5. b, I, p. 346). Of the other two explanations, the 
second is to be preferred. It is more likely that Mary is thinking of the tar- 
reaching effects of the blessing conferred upon herself than of past events un- 
connected with that blessing. In either case the six aonsts must be translated 
by the English perfect. They show that in this strophe, as in the second, we 
have a triplet There it was God's power, holiness, and mercy. Here It is 
the contrasts between proud and humble, high and low, rich and poor. 

Both lirot|<rv Kparos and Iv ppaxiovt a-urov are Hebraisms. For the 
former comp. ieid Kvplov &rolii<rev 8vaiui> (Ps. cxviu. 15). For fipaxlwr to 
express Divine power comp. Acts xui. 17 ; Jn. xii. 38 (from Is. hii. i) ; Ps. 
xhv. 3, xcviii. i, etc. The phrase & x e V* K/WTCU ical fr ppaxtovt u^X< is 
freq. in LXX (Deut. iv. 34, v. 15, vi. 21, xxvi. 8). This use of fr is in the 
mam Hebraistic (xxii. 49 ; Rev. vi. 8 ; Judg. xv. 15, xx. 16 ; I Kings xiL 18 ; 
Judith vi. 12, vuu 33). Win. xlviii. 3, d, p. 485. 

3ircpi]$oLvovs 8iavoC$ icapSCas airov. The dat. limits fnrefnj^dwevtt 
they are proud and overweening in thought. In N.T. irjrepfj$avos is never 
"conspicuous above" others, but always in a bad sense, "looking down on" 
others Qas. iv. 6; I Pet v. 5; Rom. i. 30; 2 Tim. iii. 2. Itisfreq. in 
LXX. Comp. Ps. Sol* ii. 35, KOtftifav farepi?0c?ou$ ek drc&Xeia? aJL&vwv 
, ; also iv. 28. See Wsctt on I Jn. ii 16, and Trench, Syn. 

52. KCtOeiXcv Suvdoras diro OpiSiwi' ical ifyaxrci' Taircivoife. "He 
hath put down potentates from thrones." " Potentates w rather 
than "princes" (RV.), or "the mighty" (AV.), because of i Tim. 
vi. 15. Comp. Swcwrrai 3>apaa) (Gen. L 4). In Acts viiL 27 it is 
an adj. It is probable that rcwravovs here means primarily the 
oppressed poor as opposed to tyrannical rulers. See Hatch, Biblical 
Greek, pp. 73-77. Besides the parallels given in the table (p. 31) 
COmp. avaXafJL/3dv(i)V Trppcts 6 tcvptos, rcwrcivaiv Sc a/ia/maXou? Iws ri}$ 
y^s (Ps. cxlvii. 6) ; Qpovovs ap^ovrcov Ka^etXev o icupios, /cat Ifca^MrfV 
irp^eis avr avrvv (Ecclus. x, 14); also LL xiv. 1 1, xviii 14; Jas. 
L 9, 10. In Clem. Rom. Cor. lix. 3 we have what looks like a 
paraphrase, but may easily come from O.T. Comp. Enoch xlvi. 5. 

63. ireivwrras &iTs\t\ae.v dyadur. Both material and spiritual 
goods may be included. Comp. irX^pee? a/mov yXarrwOijtrav, icat 
acrQcvovvrcs irapvjKav yrjv (i Sam. iL 5) ; also Ps. SoL v. 10-12, x. 7. 

54. "An-cXdpero "Itrpa^jX TroiSos aurou. The fourth strophe. 
The regular biblical meaning of dvriXa^a^o/wu is "lay hold of 
in order to support or succour" (Acts xx, 35 ; Ecclus. iL 6) ; hence 
dvrtX^is is "succour, help" (i Cor. xii. 28; Ps, xxL 20, Ixxxul 8), 
and dvTiXipTcop is "helper" (Ps. xviii, 3, liv. 6). There b no 
doubt that watSos avrov means "His servant," not "His son.* 
The children of God are called TCKVO, or vioi, but not muSce. We 
have flms in the sense of God's servant used of Israel or Jacob 
(Is. xii. 8, 9, xliL i, xliv. i, 2, 21, xlv. 4); of David (Lk, t 69 j 



Acts 17. 25; Ps. xvii. i; Is. xxxvii. 35); and of Christ (Acts 
iii 13, 26, iv. 27, 30). Comp. Ps. SoL xii. 7, xvii. 23; Didac^ 

IX. 2, 3, X. 2, 3. 

fii>i)<r0TJ>ai eK^ous. " So as to remember mercy," ie. to piove 
that He had not forgotten, as they might have supposed. Comp. 
Am SoL X. 4, Kal fjLVTjcrdrjarerai Kupio? roiv SovXojv ctvrot) iv eA,<, 

55. Ka0&s eXdXiicre*' irp<5s. "Even as He spake unto" : see on 
w. 2 and 13. This clause is not a parenthesis, but explains the 
extent of the remembrance of mercy. RV. is the first English 
Version to make plain that T< 'Appadji, K.T.\., depends upon 
fiviytr^vat and not upon &]<rev by rendering irpos " unto " and 
the dat. "toward." To make this still more plain, "As He spake 
unto our fathers " is put into a parenthesis, which is not necessary, 
The Genevan is utterly wrong, "(Even as He promised to our 
fathers, to wi^ to Abraham and his sede) for ever." It is im- 
probable that Lk. would use both irpos and the simple dat after 
cXaXiycrev in the same sentence; or that he means to say that 
God spoke to Abraham's seed for ever. The phrase els TOV alwwi 
b common in the Psalms, together with is TOV <uo>i/a rov atwvos 
(Heb. i. 8) and is a&va a&vos. It means "unto the age," i.e. 
the age /car* e&xifo the age of the Messiah. The belief that 
whatever is allowed to see that age will continue to exist in that 
age, makes ets TOV al&va equivalent to "for ever." This strophe, 
like ver. 72, harmonizes with the doctrine that Abraham is still 
alive (xx. 38), and is influenced by what takes place in the 
development of God's kingdom on earth (Jn. viiL 56 ; comp. Heb. 
jrii. i ; Is. xxix. 22, 23). 

For tit rbv aluva ACFMS here have fot ottrof (I Chron. xvii. 16* 
Eiek. xxv. 15 ?), which does not occur in N.T, 

56* "EfJLeiyey 8c Mapiaji <r^ aurVf. Lk. greatly prefers <TVK to 
ci He uses <rw much more often than all N.T. writers put 
together. In his Gospel we find him using <rw where the parallel 
passage in Mt or Mk. has /AT< or Kat ; t& viii 38, 51* xx, i, xxii. 14, 
56. We have crvv three times in these first two chapters ; here, iL 5 
and 13. It is not likely that an interpolator would have caught 
all these minute details in LL's style : see Introd. 6. 

<&$ pjvos Tpets- This, when compared with i^v ?KTOS (ver. 36), 
leads us to suppose that Mary waited until the birth of John the 
Baptist She would hardly have left when that was imminent 
Lk. mentions her return before mentioning the birth in order to 
complete one nanative before beginning another; just as he 
mentions the imprisonment of the Baptist before the Baptism of 
the Christ in order to finish his account of John's ministry before 
beginning to narrate the ministry of Jesus (iii. 20, 21), That 
Mary is not named in w. 57, 58 is no evidence that she was not 


present. It would be unnatural to say that one of the u^usehold 
heard of the event ; and, in fact, ot <ruyyems would include her, 
whether it is intended to do so or not Origen, Ambrose, Bede, 
and others believe that she remained until the birth of John. For 
the patristic arguments for and against see Corn. & Lap. Lk. 
leaves us in doubt, probably because his authority left him in 
doubt ; but Didon goes too far in saying that Lk. insinuates that 
she was not present. 1 

For this use of ws comp. viii. 42 (not ii. 37) ; Acts i. 15, v. 7, 36. Lk. 
more often uses utrel in this sense (iii 23, ix. 14, 28, xxii. 41, 59, xxiii. 44; 
Acts ii. 41, etc ). In &irt<rTpe\//v we have another very favourite word which 
runs through both Gospel and Acts. It does not occur in the other Gospels, 
and is found elsewhere only Gal. L 17 and Heb. vii. i. 

Meyer rightly remarks that " the historical character of the Visitation of 
Mary stands or falls with that of the Annunciation." The arguments against it 
we very inconclusive. I. That it does not harmonize with Joseph's dream in 
Mt. i. 20 ; which has been shown to be incorrect. 2. That there is no trace 
elsewhere of great intimacy between the two families ; which proves absolutely 
nothing. 3. That the obvious purpose of the narrative is to glorify Jesus, in 
making the unborn Baptist acknowledge Him as the Messiah ; which is mere 
assertion. 4. That the poetic splendour of the narrative lifts it out of the 
historical sphere ; which implies that what is expressed with great poetic beauty 
cannot be historically true, a canon which would be fatal to a great deal of 
historical material. We may assert of this narrative, as of that of the Annuncia- 
tion, that no one in the first or second century could have imagined either. 
Least of all could any one have given us the Magnificat^ '* the most magni- 
ficent cry of Joy that has ever issued from a human breast" Nothing that has 
come down to us of that age leads us to suppose that any writer could have 
composed these accounts without historic truth to guide him, any more than an 
architect of that age could have produced Milan cathedral. Comp. the Prot- 
eoangelium of James xiL-xiv.; the Pseudo-Matthew ix.-xii.; the Hist, of Joseph 
the Carpenter iii.vL 

57-80. The Birth and Circumcision of the Forerunner. 

67. lirX^orOtj 6 XP^OS TOU T&ctp aur^v. Expressions about time 
or days being fulfilled are found chiefly in these two chapters in 
N.T. (ver. 23, ii. 6, 21, 22). They are Hebraistic: eg. &r\iip<&- 
6vi<rav al vjjJLepat rot) r&iv avnyi/ (Gen. xxv. 24 ; comp. xxix. 21 j Lev. 
xiL 4, 6 ; Num. vi. 5, etc.). And TOV TCKCIV is gen. after 6 xpoVos. 

1 Didon has some excellent remarks on the poetical portion of this 
narrative. La potsie est le langage des impressions vthbnentes et des idles 
sublimes. Chez Us Juifs* comme chez tous les peuptes Orient > elle jaittait 
^inspiration. Tout fane est $octe> la joie ou la douleur la fait chanter. Si 
jamats un coeur a d& faire explosion dans quelque hymne tnspirte, test bien 
celui de lajeunefitte tlue^ de Dieu pour tire la mire du Messie. 

Elk emprunte it Fhistoire biblique des femmes qui, avant elle t ont tressailli. 
dans leur maternitl* comme Liah et la mere de Samuel des expressions qu* elk 
tlargit et transfigure. Les hymnes nationaux qui ctttbrent la gloirt de son 
feupk) la mistricorde, la puissance, la sagesse et lafidttee de Dieu, revimnent 
sur ses tores habituees 4 Its chanter (Jisus Christ^ p. 112, ed, l%$\\ Fbt 
whole passage is worth consulting. 


Ku'pios rd IXeo? aurou fjier* au-rijg. The verb is not 
used in the same sense as in ver. 46, nor yet quite literally as in 
Mt xxiii. 5, but rather "made conspicuous," i.e. bestowed con- 
spicuous mercy. Comp. e/^eyaXwas r^v &LK<uo<rvvTqv crov (Gen. 
xix. 19). The ju-er" avrijs does not mean that she co-operates 
with God, but that He thus deals with her. Comp. ver. 72, x. 37, 
and etScrc a c/^eyaXwcv psf? V/ACOV (i Sam. xii. 24). In oWx< u poi> 
auTTj we have the first beginning of the fulfilment of ver. 14. It 
means "rejoiced with her" (xv. 6, 9; i Cor. xii. 26), rather 
than "congratulated her" (Phil. ii. 17). 

59. TJXGap ircptTcjiety TO -nraiBio^ The nom. must be under- 
stood from the context, amid ad earn rem advocati, viz. some of 
those mentioned ver. 58. Circumcision might be performed 
anywhere and by any Jew, even by a woman (Exod. iv. 25). 

On the mixture of first and second aonst in such forms as 1j\0ar, 
effia/tev, dyeiXcw, etc., see Win. xiii. I. a, p 86 j WH. 11. App. p. 164; 
and comp. ver. 61, u. 16, v. 7, 26, vL 17,. vu. 24, xi. 2, 52, xxii. 52 ; Acts 
ii. 23, xii. 7, xvi. 37, xxii. 7, etc. 


K(Xoup afirfc Im TCJ> &v6pa,ri TOU irctTpds aurou. Not merely 
" they wished to call," but " they began to call, were calling " , 
comp. v. 6; Acts vii. 26; Mt. iii. 14. The custom of com- 
bining the naming with circumcision perhaps arose from Abram 
being changed to Abraham when circumcision was instituted. 
Naming after the father was common among the Jews (Jos. Vtta^ 
i ; Ant xiv. i. 3). For the M comp. eKX-jOy r' oVo/Atm avr<5v 
(Neh, vu. 63). 

60. icX^o-eTcu "Iwcii^s. It is quite gratuitous to suppose that 
the name had been divinely revealed to her, or that she chose it 
herself to express the boon which God had bestowed upon her. 
Zacharias would naturally tell her in writing what had taken place 
in the temple. With KaXeirai TU 6i/6jjLan comp. xix. 2. 

62 li/eVeuop. Here only in* N.T., but we have vevoi similarly 
used Acts xxiv. 10 and Jn. xiii. 24. Comp. cr/i/cvei o<0aA/3, 
arrjfjLaivei <Se TrooY, SiSdur/ca Be e.vvVfJLa<nv Sa/crvXeov (PrOV. vi. 13), 
and 6 o^cueoi/ o00aXftots fiera SoXot? (Prov. x. 10). Some infei 
that Zacharias was deaf as well as dumb ; and this is often the 
meaning of KOTO'S (ver. 22), viz. "blunted in speech or hearing, or 
both" (vii. 22). But the question is not worth the amount of 
discussion which it has received. 

TO TI <Lv OeXoi. The art. turns the whole clause into a sub- 
stantive. " They communicated by signs the question, what he, r 
etc. Comp. Rom. viii. 26; i Thes. iv. i; Mt xix. 18. The ri 
serves the purpose of marks of quotation. 

This use of r6 with a sentence, and especially with a question, is common 
ip Lk. (ix. 46, xix. 48, xxii. 2, 4, 23, 24, 37 ; Acts iv. 21, xxft 30), Note 


: " what he would perhaps wish, might wish." We have exactly the 
same use of &v Jn. xiu. 24 ; comp. Lk. vi. 1 1 ; Acts v. 24, xxi. 33. Win. 
xlii. 4, p. 386. 

63. ai-nqcras mraKiBiov. Postulans pugillarem (Vulg.), cum petis* 
set tabulam (d). Of course by means of signs, oo/eu//,a<riv Sa/crvXwv. 
One is inclined to conjecture that Lk. or his authority accidentally 
put the cwTjiv in the wrong place. Signs must have been used 
here, and they are not mentioned. They need not have been used 
ver. 62, and they are mentioned. The Trn/a/ci&oi/ would probably be 
a tablet covered with wax : loquitur in stylo^ auditur in cera (Tert 
De idol, xxiii.). 

All four forms, vlva, vivaKLs, mvdKLov, and miHiKlSiov, are used of writing- 
tablets, and mvaKtSa, is ./. (D) here. But elsewhere in N.T. vtva is a " disn" 
or "platter" (xi. 39 ; Mt. xiv. 8, n ; Mk. vi. 25, 28). Note the Hebraistic 
particularity in ^ypa^ev \4ywv, and comj>. 2 Kings x. 6 ; I Mac. x. 17, 
xi. 57. This is the first mention of writing in N.T. 

*lG><iT]s lorly oVopa afirou. Not Icrrat, but IVTLV : habet wcabulum 
suum quod agnovimus^ non quod elegimus (Bede) ; quasi dicat nullam 
superesse eonsultationem in re quam Deusjam definiisset (Grotius) ; 
non tamjubet) quamju3sum dimmtm indicat (Beng ). The eOaujxao-a^ 
ird^Tfis may be used on either side of the question of his deafness. 
They wondered at his agreeing with Elisabeth, although he had not 
heard her choice of name ; or, they wondered at his agreeing with 
her, although he had heard the discussion. 

64. dvc5x07i S TO orojia aurou irapaxp^fia. The prophecy 
which he had refused to believe was now accomplished, and the 
sign which had been granted to him as a punishment is withdrawn. 
That the first use of his recovered speech was to continue blessing 
God (eXoXct vA.oyaiv), rather than to complann, is evidence that the 
punishment had proved a blessing to him. The addition of ical \ 
yXwtnra aurou involves a zeugma, such as is common in all lan- 
guages: comp. i Cor. iiL 2 ; i Tim. iv. 3; Win. IxvL i. e, p. 777. 
The Complutensian Bible, on the authority of two cursives (140, 
251), inserts SujpOp&Oi] after ^ yXdJo-o-a avrov: see on iL 22. For 
irapaxpfifJta see on v, 25 and comp. iv. 29. We are left in doubt 
as to whether iXtiXei cfiXoywi' refers to the Benedictus or to some 
cSXoyia which preceded it. The use of Iwpo^ifreww and not 
cuXoy^o-cv in ver. 67 does not prove that two distinct acts of thanks- 
giving are to be understood. 

65. ly&ero Im irctrras 4><5pos. See on iv. 36. Zacharias (ver. 12) 
and Mary (ver. 30) had had the same feeling when conscious of the 
nearness of the spiritual world. A writer of fiction would have 
been more likely to dwell upon the joy which the wonderful birth 
of the future Prophet produced ; all the more so as such joy 
had been predicted (ver. 14). The aurou's means Zacharias and 


8i\a\iTO irdrra T& p%ara TCCUTCI. This need not be confined 
to what was said at the circumcision of John. It is probably the 
Hebraistic use of p^ara for the things which are the subject- 
matter of narration. Comp. ii. 19, 51, where RV. has "sayings" 
in the text and "things" in the margin; and Acts v. 32, where it 
has " things " in the text and " sayings " in the margin. Comp. 
LXX Gen. xv. i, xxii. i, 16, xxxix. 7, xL i, xlviii. i, and esp. 
xxiv. 66, Travra. ra pijfLara & ro?<rv. The verb StoXaXctv occurs 

only here and vi. 1 1 : not in LXX, but in Sym. several times in 
the Psalms. 

66. cBevTO iravrcs ot ouco-uo-avres Iv TJJ icapSCty O/UTWV. Comp. ii. 19. 
We find all three prepositions with this phrase, A, M, and els : Wero Aaveld 
Td, p^/iara iv TJJ KapSLq, a^rou (I Sam. xxi. 12) ; 0ero Acwi^X M r^v Kapflw 
atfroD (Dan i. 8) ; rlQeeQe els r^v Kapdtw tf&v (Mai. 11. 2). Lk. is fonc 1 of 
constructions with v rj K. or ev rats K. (ii. 19, ill. 15, v. 22, xxi. 14; 
comp. ii. 51, xxiv. 38). In Horn, we have both BetvaJL TI and 6eff6u rt, 
either iv QpccrL or & <mJ0eo\n Note that, not only iSTrasor^Trasa favourite 
word with Lk., but either form combined with a participle of d/corf is also 
freq. and characteristic (ii. 18, 47, iv. 28, vi. 47, vu. 29, xx. 45 ; Acts v. 5, 
II, ix. 21, x. 44, xxvi. 29 ; comp. Acts iv. 4, xvui. 8). See on vi. 30. 

TC apa T& iraiSCov TOVTO ^orai ; Not T/S ; the neut. makes the question 
more indefinite and comprehensive : comp. ri &pa, 6 H^roos eyevero (Acts xu. 
18). The &pa, igitur> means "in these circumstances j VUJL 25, xii. 42, 
xxu. 23. 

Kal yelp x^tp Kupiou v\v jutT* auToo. " For besides all that," t.e. 
in addition to the marvels which attended his birth. This is a 
remark of the Evangelist, who is wont now and then to interpose 
in this manner: comp. ii. 50, iii. 15, vii. 39, xvi. 14, xx. 20, 
xxiii. 12. The recognition that John was under special Divine 
influence caused the question, ri #pa rr<u ; to be often repeated in 
after times. Here, as in Acts xi. 21, x* l P Kvptov is followed by 
ftera, and the meaning is that the Divine power interposes to guide 
and bless. See small print on i. 20 for other parallels between 
Gospel and Acts. Where the preposition which follows is 7rt, the 
Divine interposition is generally one of punishment (Acts xiii. 1 1 ; 
Judg. iL 15; i Sam. v. 3, 6, vii 13 ; Exod. vii. 4, 5). But this is 
by no means always the case (2 Kings ill. 15; Ezra vii. 6, viil 
22, 31); least of all where x^P has the epithet ayaOy (Ezra vii. 
9, 28, viil 18). In N.T. x* L P Kvptbw is peculiar to Lk. (Acts 
xi. 21, xiii. n ; comp. iv. 28, 30). 

67-79. The Benedictus or Song of Zacharias may be the dJ- 
Xoyta mentioned in ver. 64. 1 To omit it there, in order to continue 
the narrative without interruption, and to give it as a solemn 
conclusion, would be a natural arrangement As the Magnificat 
is modelled on the psalms, so the Benedictus is modelled on the 

1 Like most of the canticles, the Benedictus was originally said at Lauds : 
and it is still said at Lauds, in the Roman Church daily, in the Greek Churcfc 
on special occasions* See footnote on p. 67. 



prophecies, and it has been called "the last prophecy of the Old 
Dispensation and the first in the New." And while the tone of 
the Magnificat is regal, that of the Benedictus is sacerdotal. The 
one is as appropriate to the daughter of David as the other to the 
son of Aaron. The relation between new and old may again be 
seen in a table. 


rf Xay avTov t 
Kal Ifyeiper ictpas ffbrrypla* ijfur 
4v otKtf AavelS rat$6r airrov, 

dr' alwvos vpo(prfr(av avroQ 

# tyOpuv JHJ.&V Kal IK 
irdvruv r&y (Uffotivruv ^aaf, 
d rQv vartpwr i}/twr 
dia&^iajs aylai ai/roO, 

rix Tarlpa 4/^^ 

Xarpetfetr a 

^tirtoy at/roO rdffatt rait , 

Kal ri 84, ra&lor, 
Tpovopctitrg yap fr&riov Kvpiov 

troindffai 6doi>* auroO, 
ry XcuyavroO 

^K ofs faiffictyerat Jjfuis 
^Tt^ayat rots & 0-*6rct /caZ 0-/c(^ 


ry Xa <JJ ovTofl. 
* lice? la?are\3 ic^at r^ Aavefd. 
4 dfareXe? ic^pas iravri ry ofr^ 'Iffpa^X. 
as XpurroG oi/rov, 

avro>>s & xeuMw 

IXeor ry ' 

rots varpdirtv T}/*^. 
i T^S $ta,$^Kijs aurov. 

K al 

ffri}<rw T 
^jMxra rot; Tarpd<rur ^^w^ 

11 ifurfffOij els rbv aluva QiaOJKiit aifrw 

SitQero r< ' 
tal rov tpKov avrov r<f 

/cai ^TrtpX^erai 65^ r/>6 rpoff&rov 

11 oi iraroticoGvret ^y x^/V ** ^f 
0avcirov ^s Xd/t^et ^0' d/tas. 
M Kadyfj&Qvs b fficfoet Kal wia 

There is a manifest break at the end of ver. 75. The first 
of these two portions thus separated may be divided into three 

1 Ps. xli. 14, Ixxii 18, cvi 48. 
4 Ezek. xxix. 21. * x Sam. ii. IO. 
Ps. cvL4S. Exod. 1L24- 

w Ps. cm 

f Ps. cxL 9. 
* Ps. cvi. ia 
M Tcr. xL . 

* Ps. czzzii. 17. 
7 Mic. vii 20. 

ir. i. 


strophes (68, 69; 70-72; 73-75), and the second into two (76, 

77; 78, 79)- 

67. irX^o-9Tj TrifrffiaTos dyiou Kal lirpcxf^reucrci'. See on ver. 15 
The prophesying must not be confined to the prediction of the 
future ; it is the delivery of the Divine message ; speaking under 
God's influence, and in His Name. Zacharias sees in his son the 
earnest and guarantee of the deliverance of Israel. 

In some texts tTrpojrfyrevffev has been altersd into the more regular i 
ey, but everywhere m N.T. (even Jude 14) the augment should precede 
the prep, in this compound. This is intelligible, seeing that there is no 
simple verb 07?r5w. Comp. Num. xi. 25, 26; Ecclus. xlui. 13, and the 
similar forms fj&tv and ijvoi^ev. Win. xii. 5, p. 84. 

68. EfiXoyrjTOS Krfpios 6 9os TOU 'lo-pa^X. Not <mV but efy is 
to be supplied. The line is verbatim as Ps. xli. 14, Ixxii. 18, 
cvi 48, excepting that in LXX rov is omitted. In N.T. evXoy^rds 
is used of God, but never of men : see on ver. 42. In LXX there 
are a few exceptions: Deut vii. 14; Ruth ii. 20; i Sam. xv. 13, 
xxv. 33. 

eireo-R^I/crro xal eiroti|cre^ XuTpaKriy TW Xacp auroG. Here, as in 
Ecclus, xxxii 17, an ace. is to be supplied after cTrecrKa^aro; there 
roy raireivw, here rov AaoV. See on vii. 16. Excepting Heb. ii. 6, 
where it is a quotation from Ps. viii. 5, this verb is used in the 
Hebrew sense (Exod. iv. 31) of Divine visitation by Lk. alone in 
N.T. Comp. Ps. Sol. iii 14. No doubt XvTpdxriv has reference 
to political redemption (ver. 71), but accompanied by and based 
upon a moral and spiritual reformation (w. 75, 77). Comp. 
Ps. cxxix. 7. 

69. Kal TJyeipeK Ke'pas cramjpLas rjfup. For this use of eyetpco 
Comp. ^ye/)v Kv/oios o-ayr^pa r<3 lorpaiJX (Judg. iii. 9, 15). In 
Ezek. xxix. 21 and Ps. cxxxii. 17 the verb used is dvaT&Xco or 
^avareXXo) (see table). The metaphor of the horn is very freq. in 
O.T. (i Sam. ii. 10; 2 Sam. xxii. 3; Ps. Ixxv. 5, 6, ii, etc.), and 
is taken neither from the horns of the altar, nor from the peaks of 
helmets or head-dresses, but from the horns of animals, especially 
bulls. It represents, therefore, primarily, neither safety nor dignity, 
but strength. The wild-ox, wrongly called "unicorn" in AV., was 
proverbial for strength (Num. xxiv. 22; Job xxxix. 9-11; Deut 
xxxiii. 17). In Horace we have addis cornua pauperi^ and in Ovid 
turn pauper cornua sumit. In Ps. xviii. 3 God is called a icepas 
<ram?/)tas. See below on ver. 71. For iraiS&s afiroO see on ver. 54. 
" In the house of His servant David " is all the more true if Mary 
was of the house of David. But the fact that Jesus was the heir 
of Joseph is sufficient, and this verse is no proof of Mary's descent 
from David. 

70. Second strophe. Like ver. 55, this is not a parenthesis, 
but determines the preceding statement more exactly. As a priest, 


Zacharias would be familiar with O.T. prophecies. Even if the rwv 
before dTr* al&vos (A C D) were genuine, it would be unlikely that 
TO>> &yfav means " the saints " in app. with T*V an al&vos irpo^^rwi/. 
Lk. is fond of the epithet 5ytos (ver. 72, ix. 26 ; Acts iii. 21, x 22, 
xxi. 28). He is also fond of the periphrasis Sid, artya-ros (Acts 
L 16, iii. 18, 21, iv. 25): comp. 2 Chron. xxxvi. 22. And the 
expression dir' aiaicos is peculiar to him in N.T. (Acts iii. 21, 
xv. 18). It is used vaguely for " of old time." Here it does not 
mean that there have been Prophets "since the world began." 
Comp. ot ytyavrcs ot cwr acaivos (Gen. vi. 4), and Karafipovra Kal 
*ara$eyy TONS fa? aiaivos pijropas (Longin. xxxiv.), and adverbially 
(Hes. Theog. 609). 

71* cr&m)piai> c IX^PW*' fyw. This is in app. with /c^pas 
<r<i>7T7pias and epexegetic of it That the cxQpwv ^wv and ro>v 
/AwrowTwv ijfias are identical is clear from Ps. xviii. 18 and cvL 10 
(see table). The heathen are meant Gentile domination prevents 
the progress of God's kingdom, and the Messiah will put an end 
to this hindrance. Comp. Exod. xviiL 10. 

Neither (rurijpia, (vv. 69, 77, xbc. 9; Acts iv. 12, etc.) nor rk <rur i fipiov 
(ii. 30, in. 6 ; Acts xxviii. 28) occur in Mt or Mk. The former occurs once 
in Jn. (iv. 22). Both are common in LXX* The primary meaning is 

preseivation from bodily harm (Gen. xxvi. 31; 2 Sam. xix. 2), especially of 
the gieat occasions on which God had preserved Israel (Exod. xiv. 13, xv. 2; 
2 Chi on. xx, 17) ; and hence of the deliverance to be wrought by the Messiah 
(Is. xhx, 6, 8), which is the meaning here. Comp. rov Kvplov % crurrjpla, tor* 
olkoj> To-pa^X els ti<j>po<rtivr}v al&vw (Ps. SoL x. 9; and very similarly xii. 7). 
As the idea of the Messianic salvation became enlarged and purified, the word 
which so often expressed it came gradually to mean much the same as 
"eiernal life." See on Rom. i. 16. 

72. iroiTJom cXeos fJtcra, K.r.X. This is k the purpose of 

s. The phrase is freq. in LXX (Gen. xxiv. 12 ; Judg. L 24, 
35 ; Ruth i. 8 ; i Sam. xx. 8, etc.). Comp. /ACT* avnj?, ver. 
58. " In delivering us God purposed to deal mercifully with our 
fathers " This seems to imply that the fathers are conscious of 
what takes place : comp. w. 54, 55. Besides the passages given 
in the table, comp. Lev. xxvL 42, and see Wsctt on Heb. ix. 
15, 16. 

73. OPKOK v 5|xocrK irp^s 'Appadpu Third strophe. The oath 
is recorded Gen. xxii 16-18 : comp. xxvi. 3. 

It is best to take tiptcor in app. with fcaft^t, but attracted in case to 
to : comp w. 4, 20, and see on ui. 19. It is true that in LXX ^v^cr^vat is 
found with an ace. (Exod. xx. 8 ; Gen. ix. 16). But would Lk. give it first 
a gen. and then an ace. in the same sentence? For the attraction of the 
antecedent to the relative comp. xx. 17 and Acts x. 36. 

opo<rcv irpls 'A. So also in Horn. (Od. xiv. 331, xix. 288) : but see 
on ver. 13, 

74. rov Sotivat tjfilv. This is probably to be taken after tpieov as the 
contents and purpose of the oath; and the promise that "thy seed shall 


possess the gate of his enemies" (Gen. xxii. 17) is in favour of this. But it 
is possible to take rov Sovvai, as epexegetic of ver. 72 ; or again, as the 
purpose of ^yetpep /c^/oas, and therefore parallel to ver. 72. This last is not 
likely, because theie is no roO with 7roi?5<reu. This rov c. infin. of the purpose 
or result is a favounte constr. with Lk. (w. 77, 79, ii. 24, where see reff.). 
It marks the later stage of the language, in which aim and purpose become 
confused with result. Perhaps the gen. of the aim may be explained on tht 
analogy of the part gen. after verbs of hitting or missing. 

x L PS exfywi'. It does not follow from oo-ionyri ical 
that spiritual enemies are meant The tyranny of heathen 
conquerors was a hindrance to holiness. In addition to the 
parallel passages quoted in the table, comp. Ps. xviii. 18, 
Swar&v *cat /c TO>V 

For the ace. f>v<r6rra$ after ijfuv comp. ffol tit ffvyyr&pn Xyr rdd' Arrf, 
jra/cws (Eur. Med. 814). 

75. XaTpeifeii' aflrw. Comp. XaTpaxrere ra> e<p 4v r<3 opci rovrqi 
(Exod iii. 12). We must take tvt&TC.ov adrou with Xarpevciv avrw. 
The service of the redeemed and delivered people is to oe a 
priestly service, like that of Zacharias (ver. 8). For Iv&mw see on 
ver. 15, and for XarperfeiK on iv. 8. The combination 6<ri<$TYis K<U 
StKaioo-rfrq becomes common ; but perhaps the earliest instance is 
Wisd. ix 3. We have it Eph. iv. 24 and Clem. Rom. xlviii.; 
comp. Tit L 8 and i Thes. ii. 10. 

76. Kal o-d 8^, iraiSiov. Here the second part of the hymn, and 
the distinctively predictive portion of it, begins. The Prophet 
turns from the bounty of Jehovah in sending the Messiah to the 
work of the Forerunner. "But thou also, child," or "Yea and 
thou, child" (RV.). Neither the /cat nor the 8e must be neglected. 
There is combination, but there is also contrast Not "my child": 
the personal relation is lost in the high calling. The KXTjO^cnj has 
the same force as in ver. 32 : not only " shalt be," but " shalt be 
acknowledged as being." 

-irpOTTOpeucrr) yap iv&mov Kupiou. Comp. Kvptos 6 eos crov 6 

7Tp07rOpUO/AVOS TTpO TTpOd^TCOV <TOV, KO.Q(J. eXoA.I/O'fV KvptOS (DeUt 

ICXXL 3). Here Kvptbv means Jehovah, not the Christ, as is clear 
from w. 16, 17. 

77. TOU Soucai yvwrw o-a>Tr]pta$ TW XaaT auroC. This is the aim 
and end of the work of the Forerunner. In construction it comes 
after Irot/xacrot oSous a&rov. We may take i> d+^o-ei djmapTiwi/ afirwK 
with either Sowai, or yvojcriv, or oxonyp/as. The last is best. John 
did not grant remission of sins; and to make "knowledge of 
salvation" consist in remission of sins, yields no very clear sense. 
But that salvation is found in remission of sins makes excellent 
sense (Acts v. 31). The Messiah brings the o-omypi'a (pv. 69, 71); 
the Forerunner gives the knowledge of it to the people, as consist- 
ing, not in a political deliverance from the dominion of Rome but 


in a spiritual deliverance from the dominion of sin This is the 
irst mention of the " remission of sins " in the Gospel narrative, 

78. 8ia (TTfXdyxva IX^ous eou TjjjLwy. The concluding strophe, 
referring to the whole of the preceding sentence, or (if we take a 
single word) to TrpoTropeucry. It is because of God's tender mercy 
that the child will be able to fulfil his high calling and to do ail 
this. Comp. Test. XII. Pair. Levi iv., Iws cTrio-KCj/nyTat Kuptos Travra 
TO, f&viri V arrXayvois vlov avrov fa>s a two 5. 

Originally the ffir\<iyx va ' wef e the "inward parts," esp. the upper portions, 
the heart, lungs, and liver (viscera thoraets), as distinct from the ft/repa or bowels 
(mscera abdomtms). The Greeks made the ffir\&, the seat of the emotions, 
anger, anxiety, pity, etc. By the Jews these feelings were placed in the &T/>O ; 
and hence in LXX we have not only <nr\&YXva, (which may include the frrepa), 
but also Koi\La and fycara used for the affections. Moreover in Hebr. literature 
these words more often represent compassion or love, whereas <rir\fcfxya. in class* 
Grk. is more often used of wrath (Anstoph. JZan. 844, 1006 ; Eur. Ale. 1009). 
"Heart" is the nearest English equivalent for ffirXdyxva (RV. Col. in. 12; 
Philem. 12, 20). See Lft. on Phil. i. 8. "Because of our God's heart of 
mercy," i.e. merciful heart, is the meaning here. For this descriptive or 
characterizing gen. comp. Jas. L 25, u. 4 ; Jude 18. Some would make yvQw 
ffwrypLas an instance of it, "saving knowledge," *.. that brings salvation. But 
this is not necessary. For $v ots see on & ^pa%ow, ver. 51. For iiru 
comp. vii. 17 ; Ecclus. xlvi. 14 ; Judith viii. 33 ; and see on ver. 68. 

e| ityous. " Rising from on high." The word is used 
of the rising of the sun (Rev. vii. 2, xvl 12; Horn. Od. xii. 4) and 
of stars (^Esch. P. V. 457; Eur. Pk&n. 504). Here the rising of 
the heavenly body is put for the heavenly body itself, Comp. the 
use of dvarcAAo) in Is. Ix. i and MaL iv. 2. Because sun, moon, 
and stars do not rise from on high, some join ef vi/rovs with 
rio-Ki/rTat, which is admissible. But, as avaroXrj means the sun 
or star itself, whose light comes from on high, this is not necessary. 
Seeing that avarlXX^ is used of the rising or sprouting of plants^ 
and that the Messiah is sometimes called " the Branch " (Jer. xxiil 
5, xxxiii. 15; Zech. iii. 8, vL 12), and that in LXX this is expressed 
by avaToXiq, some would adopt that meaning here. But e vi/rovs, 
fauttavu, and icareutfwai are conclusive against it These expres- 
sions agree well with a rising sun or star, but not with a sprouting 

79. im^acai ro?9 c worei icat o-Kia Oai/drou Ka0Y]jA&'ous. For 
comp. Acts xxvii. 20, and for the form Ps. xxx. 17, cxviL 
27. In 3 Mac. vi. 4 we have Sv $apao> . . . aTrwAco-as, $yyos 
eTTt^avas eXcous 'Icrpa^X yei/ct. Note that the Ka6rjfjLwov<; & <r/c6Va 
of Is. xlii 7 and the cmp Bavdrov of Is. ix. i are combined here as 
in Ps. evil 10 (see table). Those who hold that these hymns are 

1 This is the reading of 8 B Syr. Arm. Goth. Boh. and virtually of L, 
which has ta-eratyamu. Godet defends taeoTf^uro, because Zacharias would 
not suddenly turn from the past to the future ; but this thought would lead to 
the corruption of the more difficult reading. 


written in the interests of Ebionism have to explain why Tr 
j'ovs w TTTw^eta (Ps. cvii. 10) is omitted. 

TOU KaTu0Gi>cu Tofis TTo8a$ tjjxwj' cis oSdi' ipiqn]$, For the constr 
comp. w. 74, 77. Those who sat in darkness did not use their 
feet . the light enables them to do so, and to use them profitably. 
The tyu-uiv shows that Jews as well as Gentiles are regarded as being 
in darkness until the Messianic dawn. " The way of peace " is the 
way that leads to peace, especially peace between God and His 
people (Ps. xxix. n, Ixxxv. 9, cxix. 165; Jer. xiv. 13). It was one 
of the many blessings which the Messiah was to bring (ii. 14, x. 5, 
xxiv. 36). See on Rom. i. 7 and comp. oSbv <ram7pt'as(Actsxvi. 17), 

80. Td Sc TraiSio*' tjugavc ica! eicpaTaiouTO ir^ujman. The verse 
forms a set conclusion to the narrative, as if here one of the 
Aramaic documents used by Lk. came to an end. Comp. ii. 40, 
52 , Judg. xiii. 24, 25; i Sam. ii. 26. In LXX aufavw is never, as 
here, mtrans. Thus a^favoi ere cr^oSpa (Gen. xvii. 6); vjv^Orj TO 
TTcuSiV (Gen. xxi. 8). In N.T. it is used of physical growth (ii. 40, 
xii. 27, xiii. 19), and of the spread of the Gospel (Acts vi. 7, xii. 24, 
xix. 20). With e/cparaiovTO irvevfjLari. comp. Eph. hi. 16; and for 
the dat Rom. iv. 20 and i Cor. xiv. 20. 

fy lv TCUS ep^jxois. The wilderness of Judaea, west of the Dead 
Sea, is no doubt meant But the name is not given, because the 
point is, not that he lived in any particular desert, but that he lived 
in desert places and not in towns or villages. He lived a solitary 
life. Hence nothing is said about his being "in favour with men"; 
for he avoided men until his dvaSct^t? brought him disciples. This 
fact answers the question whether John was influenced by the 
Essenes, communities of whom lived in the wilderness of Judsea, 
We have no reason to believe that he came in contact with them. 
Excepting the ascetic life, and a yearning for something better 
than obsolete Judaism, there was little resemblance between their 
principles and his. He preached the Kingdom of God; they 
preached isolation. They abandoned society , he strove to reform 
it. See Godet in loco and D.B* art "Essenes." Lk. alone uses 
the plur. at Ip^fioL (v. 16, viri. 29). 

!ft>S TJi^pas dyaSeiJeus aurou irp&$ TOI> 'icrpa^X. John probably 
went up to Jerusalem for the feasts, and on those occasions he and 
the Messiah may have met, but without John's recognizing Him as 
such. Here only in N.T. does cWSaf ts occur. In Ecclus. xhii. 6 
we have dvaScif LV xpovov as a function of the moon. In Plut the 
word is used of the proclaiming or inauguration of those who are 
appointed to office (Mar. viu. ; C. Grac. xii.). It is also used of 
the deoecation of a temple (Strabo, vui. 5. 23, p. 381). Comp. 
dveSctfc* of the appointment of the Seventy (x. i). It was John 
himselr fho proclaimed the inauguration of his office by manifesting 
hims<JOr o the people at God 7 s command (iii. 2), 



More than any other Evangelist Lk. makes use of the Hebr. formula, 
o^ or Kal &Y&GTO. But with it he uses a variety of constructions, some of which 
are modelled on the classical use of awtpT), which Lk. himself employs Acts xxi. 
35. The following types are worth noting. 

(a) The tyfrero and that which came to pass are placed side by side as 
parallel statements in the indicative mood without a conjunction. 

i. 8. eyevero 8$ & r$ leparetietv afobv . . . ^Xa%e rov Qv/uacrcu. 

i. 23. Kal eyevero <&s e^rMjff&ijo-av al fifdpai rijs \eiTovprylas atfroO, airi}\0ev. 

L 41. Kal tyfrcro &s iJKOVffev rbv dtnraa-^ r^s M. VB., tffKtprya-ev rb ftp*<f>Qt t 

ii. I. tyevcro 81 & rats jjfjtfpats iKctvats tifiXQev doyjjui. 

Of the same type are i. 59, ii. 6, 15, 46, vu. ii, ix. 18, 28, 29, 33, 37, xL x, 
14, 27, xvii. 14, xviii. 35, xix. 29, xx. I, xxiv. 30, 51. In vui. 40, ix. 57, x* 
38 the eyfrero 84 is probably spurious. In the Acts this type does not occur. 

(ft) The tyevero and that which came to pass are coupled together by ical, 

....... ...... (2) 


v* I. eye"vero 8 ev r$ rbv 6"x\ov ewiKeurBat avrf . . . Kal avrbs fy k<rr&t+ 
v. 17. Kal frytvero fr fug TUV jjfttpw Kal attrbs ty $idd<TK(ov. 

viii. I. Kal tyfrero tv rtj> KaQe&js Kal atirks 8i68vev. 

viii. 22. ty&cro W ^ fuy. ruv faptav xal afa-fo aytpy els IT\OIOP. 

Of the same type are v. 12, ix. 51, xiv. i, xvii. ii, xix. 15, xxiv. 4; Acts 
v. 7. It will be observed that in nearly all cases the Kal is followed by avr6t or 
afoot. In v. 12 and xxiv. 4 it is followed by the Hebraistic I6ot, and in xix, 15 
we have simply Kal etirep. 

(y) That which takes place is pat in the infinitive mood, and this depends 
upon iy&ero. 

lit 21. tyfrcro $4 twrtf pavriffQijvai avarm rbv \abv . . . 

vi X. iyfrero 9k cr ffappdry $iairopeticcr6at, avrbv dta ffvoptfwr* 
vL 12. tyfrero dt & rais Tjfdpais Tafrnus gekQciv afrrbv eh rb 6pot* 
xvi. 22, frytvero Se avodaveiv rbv irna^hv. 

This type of construction is common in the Acts : iv. 5, ix. 32, 37, 43, xL 26, 
xiv. I, xvi. 16, xix. i, xxii. 6, 17, xxviii. 8, 17. 

(5) In the Acts we have several other forms still more closely assimilated to 
classical constructions, the eyevera being placed later in the sentence, or being 
preceded by &s or ^re. 

ix. 3. cv tie r$ iropefacrQai ey&ero afrrbv tyytfetv r$ AO/UKTIC^. 
xxL I. (&f W ^y^ero ajraxjdfyat ^/tay . . . 1j\0otAep els r$v Ka). 
xxt 5. foe Se iyevero e^apricrai. ijfias ras ^/>as, ^fXdovres &ropcv6fJL8a. 

x. 25. tis Se ey&ero rov cl<rc\6ev rbv Uerpov, . . . irpwreKtivijo-cv. 
In these last three instances we are far -removed from the Hebraistic types (a) 
and (ft). The last is very peculiar ; but comp. xxvii. i and the exact parallel in 
Acta Barndb. A$ocryp. vu. quoted by Lumby, cfo Se frytvero rov repeat a/roi)f 

We have obtained in this analysis the following results. Of the two Hebra- 
istic types, (a) is very common in the first two chapters of the Gospel, where Lk 
is specially under the influence of Hebrew thought and literature, and is probably 
translating from the Aramaic ; but (a) is not found at all in the Acts, and (ft) 
occurs there only once. On the other hand, of the more classical types, (7) is 
much less common in the Gospel than in the Acts, while the forms grouped 
under (S) do not occur in the Gospel at all. All which is quite what we might 
have expected. In the Acts there is much less room for Hebrew influences than 
there is in the Gospel ; and thus the more classical forms of construction Ucoott 
there the prevailing types. 


H. 1-2O. The Birth of the Saviour^ ifs Proclamation by the 
Angels, and its Verification by the Shepherds. 

The second of the narratives in the second group (L 57-ii. 40) 
in the Gospel of the Infancy (L 5~ii. 52). It corresponds to the 
Annunciation (L 26-38) in the first group. Like the sections which 
precede and which follow, it has a clearly marked conclusion. And 
these conclusions have in some cases a very marked resemblance* 
Comp. ii. 20 with L 56, and ii. 40 and 52 with i. So. This 
similarity of form points to the use of material from one and 
the same source, and carefully arranged according to the sub- 
ject-matter. This source would be some member of the Holy 
Family (see on L 5). The marks of Lk.'s style, accompanied by 
Hebraistic forms of expression, still continue; and we infer, as 
before, that he is translating from an Aramaic document. The 
section has three marked divisions : the Birth (1-7), the Angelic 
Proclamation (8-14), and the Verification (15-20). The con- 
nexion with what precedes is obvious. We have just been told 
how the promise to Zacharias was fulfilled ; and we are now to be 
told how the promise to Mary was fulfilled. 

1-7. The Birth of the Saviour at Bethlehem at the Time of the 
Enrolment The extreme simplicity of the narrative is in very 
marked contrast with the momentous character of the event thus 
narrated. We have a similar contrast between matter and form in 
the opening verses of S. John's Gospel The difference between 
the evangelical account and modern Lives of Christ is here very 
remarkable. The tasteless and unedifying elaborations of the 
apocryphal gospels should also be compared. 1 

1-3. How Bethlehem came to be the Birthplace of Jesus 
Christ, although Nazareth was the Home of His Parents. This 
explanation has exposed Lk. to an immense amount of criticism, 
which has been expressed and sifted in a manner that has produced 
a voluminous literature. In addition to the commentaries, some 

1 *' Such marvellous associations have clung for centuries to these verses, that 
it is hard to realise how absolutely naked they are of all ornament. We are 
obliged to read them again and again to assure ourselves that they really do se4 
forth what we call the great miracle of the world. If, on the other hand, the 
Evangelist was possessed by the conviction that he was not recording a miracle 
which had interrupted the course of history and deranged the order of human 
life, but was telling of a divine act which explained the course of history and 
restored the order of human life, one can very well account for hi* calmness" 
(F. D. Maurice, Lectures on S. Luke, p. 28, ed. 1879). 


of the following may be consulted, and from Schiirer and Herzog 
further information about the literature may be obtained. 

S. J. Andrews, Life of our Lord, pp. 71-81, T. & T. Clark, 
1892 ; T. Lewin, Fasti Sacri, 955, Longmans, 1865 ; J. B. 
McClellan, The New Testament of our Lord and Saviour, i. pp. 
392-399, Macmillan, 1875; C F. Nosgen, Geschichte Jesu Christi^ 
pp. 172-174, Beck, 1891; *E. Schurer, Jewish People in the Time of 
Jesus Christ, i. 2, pp. 105-143, T. & T. Clark, 1890; B. Weiss, 
Lebenjesu, i. 2. 4, Berlin, 1882 ; Eng. tr. pp. 250-252 ; K. Wieseler, 
Chronological Synopsis of the Four Gospels^ pp, 66-106, 129-135, 
Deighton, 1864; 0. Zodder, Handbuch der Theologiscfan Wissen- 
sckaften^ i. 2, pp. 188-190, Beck, 1889; A. W. Zumpt, Das 
Geburtsjahr Christi (reviewed by Woolsey in the Bibliotheca Sacra> 
1870), Leipzig, 1869; D.B? art "Cyrenius"; Herzog, PRE? 
xiii. art. " Schatzung " ; P. Schaff, History of the Church, L pp. 
121-125, T. & T. Clark, 1883; Ramsay, Was Christ Born at 
Bethlehem ? 1899 ; Hastings, D.B art. Chronology of N.T. 

1. *Ey^TO Be tv rats fjfJ^pais IKCIWUS ^XOcF $6yjia irapa Kai- 
arapos Afiyouorou diroYP&J>c<r0ai ircurav TTJI> olKOUft&i)?. For the COnstn 
see detached note at the end of ch. L ; and for & rats ^e'pais 
e/ctVais see on i. 5 and 39. The time of the birth of John is 
roughly indicated. Even in class. Grk. the first meaning of Soy^a, 
as " opinion, philosophic tenet," is not very common (Plat Rep. 
538 C); it is more often a " public decree, ordinance." This is 
always the meaning in N.T., whether an ordinance of the Roman 
Emperor (Acts xvii. 5), or of the Apostles (Acts xvL 4; comp. 
Ign. Mag. xiii.; DidacM, XL 3), or of the Mosaic Law (CoL iL 14; 
Eph. ii. 15; comp. 3 Mac. i 3; Jos. Ant. xv. 5. 3). For e^jXflev 
8<$Yfia comp. Dan. ii, 13 (Theod.). In Daniel 8oy/xa is fireq. of a 
royal decree (iii. 10, iv. 3, vi. 9, 10). See Lft on CoL iL 14. 

diroypc<|>a0ai. Probably passive, uf describeretur (Vulg.), not 
middle, as in ver. 3. The present is here used of the continuous 
enrolment of the multitudes ; the aorist in ver. 5 of the act of one 
person. The verb refers to the writing off> copying, or entering 
the names, professions, fortunes, and families of subjects in the 
public register, generally with a view to taxation (dTrort/jt^crts or 
rtfMf/jui). It is a more general word tha.n daron/tcwo, which implies 
assessment as well as enrolment But it is manifest that the dire 
y/>aty here and in Acts v. 37 included assessment The Jews were 
exempt fiom military service; and enrolment for that purpose 
cannot be intended. In the provinces the census was mainly for 
purposes of taxation. 

ircurai' TI\V OIKOU/J^K. "The whole inhabited world," Lc* the 
Roman Empire, arms terrarum. Perhaps in a loose way the ex- 
pression might be used of the provinces only. But both the -n-aow 
and the context exclude the limitation to Palestine, a meaning 


which the expression never has, not even in Jos. Ant. viii. 3. 4. 
See on iv. 5 and xxi. 26. In inscriptions Roman Emperors are 
called KvpLoi TTJS oLcou/i^s. The verse implies a decree for a general 
census throughout the empire. 

It must be confessed that no direct evidence of any such decree 
exists beyond this statement by Lk., and the repetitions of it by 
Christian writers. But a variety of items have been collected, 
which tend to show that a Roman census in Judaea at this time, 
in accordance with some general instructions given by Augustus, 
is not improbable. 

I. The rationanum or rationes imperil, which was a sort of balance-sheet 
published periodically by the emperor (Suet. Aug. xxvui.; CaL xvi.). 2. The 
hbellus or brcoianum totius imperil, which Augustus deposited with his will 
(Tac. Ann. i, n. 5, 6; Suet. Aug. ci.). 3- The index rerum gestarum to be 
inscribed on his tomb, which was the original of the Marmor Ancyranum. 
But these only indicate the orderly administration of the empire. A general 
census would have been useful in producing such things ; but that does not 
prove that it took place. Two passages m Dion Cassius are cited ; but one of 
these (liv. 35) refers to a registration of the emperor's private property, and 
the other (Iv. 13) to a census of Roman citizens. If Augustus made a 
general survey of the empire, of which there is evidence from the commen- 
tarii of Agnppa mentioned by Pliny (Nat. Hist. lii. 2. 17), this also would 
have been conveniently combined with a general census, although it does 
nit show that such a census was ordered. Of some of the provinces we 
^now that no census was held in them during the reign of Augustus. But 
it is probable that in the majority of them a census took place; and the 
statement of so accurate a writer as Lk., although unsupported by direct evi- 
detce, may be accepted as substantially true : viz. that in the process of reduc- 
ing the empire to order, Augustus had required that a census should be held 
throughout most of it. So that Lk. groups the various instances under one ex- 
pression, just as in Acts xi. 28 he speaks of the famines, which took place in 
different parts of the empire in th time of Claudius, as a famine e^' $\ijv ohov- 
{LVI)V* Of the Christian witnesses none is of much account. Riess seems to be 
almost alone in contending that Orosius (Hist. Rom. vi. 22. 6) had any 
authority other than Lk. Cassiodorus ( Vanarum Epp. in. 52) does not men- 
tion a census of persons at all clearly ; but if orbis Romanus agris divisus cen* 
suque descriptus est means such a census, he may be referring to Lk. ii. I. The 
obscure statement of Isidore of Spain (Etymologiarum, v. 26. 4 ; Opera, Hi. 229, 
ed. Arevallo) may either be derived from Lk. or refer to another penod. What 
Suidas states (Lex. $.v. dxoypa^J) partly comes from Lk. and partly is impiob- 
able. At the best, all this testimony is from 400 to zooo years after the event, 
and cannot be rated highly. The passages are given in full by Schurer (Jewish 
People in the T. ofj. C. i. 2, pp. 116, 117). But it is urged that a Roman 
census, even if held elsewhere, could not have been made in Palestine during the 
time of Herod the Great, because Palestine was not yet a Roman province. In 
A.D. 6, 7, when Quinmus certainly did undertake a Roman census in Judaea, 
such a proceeding was quite m order. Josephus shows that in taxation Herod 
acted independently (Ant. xv. 10. 4, xvi. 2. 5, xvii. 2. 1, II. 2 ; comp. xvii. 8. 4). 
That Herod paid tribute to Rome is not certain ; but, if so, he would pay it out 
of taxes raised by himself. The Romans would not assess his subjects for the 
tribute which he had to pay. Josephus, whose treatment of the last years of 
Herod is very full, does not mention any Roman census at that time. On the 
contrary, he implies that, even after the death of Herod, so long as Palestine 
was ruled by its own princes, there was no Roman taxation *, and he states that 


the census undertaken by Quirinius A.D. 7 excited intense opposition, j"esmn 
ably as being an innovation (Ant. xvui. I. i, 2. i). 

In meeting this objection, let us admit with Schurer and Zumpt that the case 
of the Chtse is not parallel. Tacitus (Ann. vi. 41. i) does not say that the 
Romans held a census in the dominions of Archelaus, but that Archelaus wished to 
have a census after the Roman fashion. Nevertheless, the objection that Augustus 
would not interfere with Herod's subjects in the matter of taxation is untenable. 
When Palestine was divided among Herod's three sons, Augustus ordered that 
the taxes of the Samaritans should be reduced by one-fourth, because they had 
not taken part in the revolt against Varus (Ant. xviL 1 1. 4 ; B. J. u 6. 3) ; and 
this was before Palestine became a Roman province. If he could do that, he 
could require information as to taxation throughout Palestine ; and the obsequi- 
ous Heiod would not attempt to resist. 1 The value of such information would 
be great. It would show whether the tnbute paid (if tribute was paid) was 
adequate ; and it would enable Augustus to decide how to deal with Palestine 
in the future. If he knew that Herod's health was failing, he would be anxious 
to get the information before Herod's death ; and thus the census would take 
place just at the time indicated by Lk., viz. in the last months of the reign of 

g. aunrj diroypa^Tj Trp^-n) frflvero. This may be accepted as 
certainly the true reading; 2 and the meaning of it is not really 
doubtful "This took place as a first enrolment, when Q. was 
governor of Syria." The object of the remark is to distinguish 
the census which took Joseph and Mary to Bethlehem from the 
one undertaken by Q. in A.D. 6, 7, at which time Q. was governor 
of Syria. But was he governor B.C. 4, when Herod died? It is 
very difficult to establish this. 

From B.C. 9 to 6 Sentius Saturninus was governor; from B.C. 
6 to 4 Quinctilius Varus. Then all is uncertain until A.D. 6, 
when P. Sulpicius Quirinius becomes governor and holds the 
census mentioned Acts v. 37 and also by Josephus (Ant. xviii. 
i. i, 2. i). It is quite possible, as Zumpt and others have shown, 
that Quirinius was governor of Syria during part of the interval 
between B.C. 4 and A.D. 6, and that his first term of office was 
B.C. 3, 2. But it seems to be impossible to find room for him 
between B.C. 9 and the death of Herod ; and, unless we can do 
that, Lk. is not saved from an error in chronology. Tertullian 
states that the census was held by Sentius Saturninus (Adv. Marc. 
iv. 19) ; and if that is correct we may suppose that it was begun 
by him and continued by his successor. On the other hand, 
Justin Martyr three times states that Jesus Christ was born rl 
Kvpyvtav, and in one place states that this can be officially ascer- 
tained IK T<!>v diroypa^coK TG>V ycvopcv&v (AfoL L 34, 46; DiaL 

1 See the treatment to which Herod had to submit in the matter of Sylbeui 
(Jos. Ant. xvi. 9. 3, 4). 

J B (supported by 8x, 131, 203) has atirq diroypajAi irpdn} cyber*. 
K has the impossible aMjv faraypaffiv fy&ero irpc&n;. 
D (supported by Orig-Lat.) has atirq ey&ero droypaffl vp&nj. 
Thus all three are against the ^ before &iroypa<Mi inserted in A C L R . 


We must be conu-nt to leave the difficulty unsolved. But it is 
monstrous to argue that because Lk. has (possibly) made a mistake 
as to Quirinius being governor at this time, therefore the whole 
story about the census and Joseph's journey to Bethlehem is a 
fiction Even if there was no census at this time, business con- 
nected with enrolment might take Joseph to Bethlehem, and Lk. 
would be correct as to his main facts. That Lk. has confused 
this census with the one in A.D. 6, 7, which he himself mentions 
Acts v. 37, is not credible. We are warranted in maintaining (i) 
that a Roman census in Judaea at this time, in accordance with 
instructions given by Augustus, is not improbable ; and (2) that 
some official connexion of Quirinius with Syria, and the holding of 
this census is not impossible. The accuracy of Lk. is such that 
we ought to require very strong evidence before rejecting any 
statement of his as an unquestionable blunder. But it is far 
better to admit the possibility of error than to attempt to evade 
this by either altering the text or giving forced interpretations of it 

The following methods of tampering with the text have been suggested : to 
regard vp&nei as a corruption of vp&rtp rei through the intermediate vpwrei 
(Lmwood); to insert vp& rrjs after cytvero (Michaelis); to substitute for Kv- 
pyviov either KutmMov (Huetius), or K/>ovfoi/=Saturmni (Heumann), or Zarou/>- 
vivov (Valesius) ; to omit the whole verse as a gloss (Beza, Pfaff, Valckenaer). 
All these are monstrous. The only points which can be allowed to be doubtful 
in die text are the accentuation of affny and the spelling of Kvpqvlov, to which 
may perhaps be added the insertion of the article. 

Among the various interpretations may be mentioned 

(1) Giving irpuros a comparative force, as in Jn. i. 15, 30: "This taxing 
took place before Quirinius was governor of Syria" (Huschke, Ewald, Caspan) ; 
or, as e<r%4rj7 ruv vlwv % fufrrrip ^reXetfrijo-e (2 Mac. vii. 41) means "The mother 
died last of all, and later than her sons," this may mean, " This took place as 
the first enrolment, and before Q. was governor of S." (Wieseler). But none of 
these passages are parallel: the addition of ijyefJwveiJOvTos is fatal. When 
irpwros is comparative it is followed by a simple noun or pronoun. It is 
incredible that Lk. , if he had meant this, should have expressed it so clumsily. 

(2) Emphasizing eyfrero, as m Acts xi. 28: "This taxing took effect, 
was carried out, when Q. was governor of S." (Gumpach, etc.) ; i.e. the decree 
was issued in Herod's tune, and executed ten or twelve years later by Q. 
This makes nonsense of the narrative Why did Joseph go to Bethlehem to be 
enrolled, if no enrolment took place then ? There would be some point in 
saying that the census VMS finished, brought to a close, under Q., after having 
been begun by Herod ; but eytyero cannot possibly mean that. 

(3) Reading and accentuating a,Mi % &iroyp(njrf : " The raising of the tax 
itself (as distinct from the enrolment and assessment) first took place when Q.," 
etc. " Augustus ordered a census and it took place, but no money was raised 
until the time of Q." (Ebrard). This involves giving to &ir<rypa.<fr/i in ver. 2 
a totally different meaning from &roypd<j>((r6cu in ver. I and &voypdif>a<r0aA in 
ver. 5 ; which is impossible. 

(4) With aiH? ^ dro7pa0ij, as before: "The census itself called the first 
took place when Q.," etc. The better known census under Q. was commonly 
regarded as the first Roman census in Judaea: Lk. reminds his readers that 
there had really been an earlier one (Godet). This is very forced, requires the 
insertion of the article, which is almost certainly an interpolation, ana assume! 


that the census of A.D. 6, 7 was generally known as " \htjirst census." From 
Acts v. 37 it appears that it was known as "the census": no previous or 
subsequent enrolment was taken into account. In his earlier edition Godet 
omitted the ^ : in the third (1888) he says that this interpretation requires the 
article (i. p. 170). 

McClellan quotes in illustration of the construction : tilrla te atinj 

rov iro\t/Aov (Thuc. i. 55 3) ; atirq TUP vepl G^jSas ey&ero bp-xft irai 
ffit vp&ni (Dem. 291. IO) ; wpcfrn/ jjJky pffywru cytvero atiri] icari rotfrcw 
dvdpQv (Andoc. lu. 5) ; atfri; i-pAry S^oreX^s Averts ey^vero d/jerifc irpbs 

irXcDrov (Aristid. i. 124) ; and adds the cunous remark that "the Holy Spirit 
would have us note that the Saviour of the World was registered in the first 
census of the World!" 

TTJS lupias KupTjytou. Like ^yejuxov (xx. 20, 
xxi. 12, etc.) and ^ye/iovta (iii. i), the verb is generic, and may 
express the office of any ruler, whether emperor, propraetor, 
procurator, etc. It does not teU us that Quirinius was legatus 
in B.C. 4 as he was in A.D. 6. And it should be noted that Justin 
(see above) states that Quirinius was procurator (eVcrpoTros) at the 
time of this census (ApoL i. 34); and that in the only other 
place in which Lk. uses this verb he uses it of a procurator (iii. i). 
This gives weight to the suggestion that, although Varus was 
kgatus of Syria at the time of the enrolment, yet Quirinius may 
have held some office in virtue of which he undertook this census. 
Lk. is probably not giving a mere date. He implies that 
Quirinius was in some way connected with the enrolment For 
what is known about P. Sulpicius Quirinius see Tac. Ann. il 
30. 4, iil 22. i, 2, 23. i, and esp. 48; Suet Tib. xlix. Dion 
Cassius (liv. 48) calls him simply IlbVXios 2o-uA.7rtKtos. But he 
was not really a member of the old patrician gens Sulpida. The 
familiar word Quirinus (Kvptvos) induced copyists and editors to 
substitute Quirinus for Quirinius. 

B has Kvpetvov, but there is no doubt that the name is Quirinius and not 
Quirinus. This is shown, as Furneaux points out in a note on Tac. Ann. ii. 
30. 4, by the MS. readings in Tacitus ; by the Greek forms JLvpLvios (Strabo, 
12, 6, 5, 569) and Kvpjjvios (here and Jos. Ant* xviii. i. 1} ind by Latin 
inscriptions (Orell. 3693, etc.). Quirinius is one of the earliest mstances of a 
person bearing two Gentile names. 

3. KCU liropeuonro irdrrcs diroypdtyecrOai, IKOOTOS cis 'rtji' <XUTOO 
ty. The feat looks back to ver. i, ver. 2 being a parenthesis. 

The TOVT6? means all those in Palestine who did not reside at the 
seat of their family. A purely Roman census would have required 
nothing of the kind. If Herod conducted the census for the 
Romans, Jewish customs would be followed So long as Augustus 
obtained the necessary information, the manner of obtaining it was 
immaterial. Where does Lk place the death of Herod ? 

4. 'Aixfpi] 81 Rat 'lo><r$}<J> fati TIJ$ TaXiXaias IK iroXcas Naap*r. 
For dp^jSY] '-omp. ver. 42, xviii, 31, xix. 28; Acts xL 2; and fix 


$1 K<XL see on iii. 9. Note the change of prep, fvom d to & 
But &ir6 is used of towns (x. 30 j Acts viii. 26, xiii. 14, xx. 17, 
etc.), and IK of districts (xxiii. 55 ; Acts vii. 4, etc.) m r so that there 
is no special point in the change, although it should be preserved 
in translation. Comp. Jn. L 45 and xi. i ; also the & of Lk. 
xxi. 1 8 with the cwro of Acts xxvii. 34. 

els iroXip AaueiS. That Bethlehem was David's birthplace and 
original home is in accordance with i Sam. xvii. 12 ff. and xvii. 58 ; 
but both passages are wanting in LXX. In O.T. " ttie city of 
David " always means the fortress of Zion, formerly the stronghold 
of the Jebusites (2 Sam. v. 7, 9; i Chron. xi. 5, 7), and in LXX 
TroAis in this phrase commonly has the article. Bethlehem us about 
six miles from Jerusalem. Note that Lk. does not connect < ,hnst's 
birth at Bethlehem with prophecy. 

jjrts (caXetrai BijOXc^p. In late Greek font is sometimes scarce 1 ^ dis- 
tinguishable from ds : comp. Acts xvu. 10. But in ix. 30 (as in Acts x&ui 14, 
xzviii. 18, and Eph i. 23, which are sometimes cited as instances of &r= 
6s) there may be special point in tons. Even here it may *' denote an 
attribute which is the essential property of the antecedent," and may possibly 
refer to the meaning of Bethlehem. Comp. vtifov jcrfous ratf-n^, #rts vvv 
Mtfupit KaXecrai (Hdt, ii. 99, 7). 

"House of Bread"; one of the most ancient 
towns in Palestine. It is remarkable that David did nothing 
for Bethlehem, although he retained affection for it (2 Sam. 
xxiiL 15); and that Jesus seems never to have visited it again. 
In Jn. vii. 42 it is called a KcS/wy, and no special interest seems 
to have attached to the place for many years after the birth of 
Christ Hadrian planted a grove of Adonis there, which con- 
tinued to exist from A.D. 135 to 315. About 330 Constantine 
built die present church. &.J3? art " Bethlehem." The modern 
name is Beit Lahm ; and, as at Nazareth, the population is almost 
entirely Christian. 

oticou K. Trarpias. Both words are rather indefinite, and either 
may include the other. Here 01*05 seems to be the more com- 
prehensive ; otherwise /cat Trarpias would be superfluous. Usually 
irarpid is the wider term. That a village carpenter should be able 
to prove his descent from David is not improbable. The two 
grandsons of S. Jude, who were taken before Domitian as 
descendants of David, were labourers (Eus. H. E* iii 20. 1-8). 

5. diroypd>a<r6ai. "To get himself enrolled." The aorist of 
his single act, the present (ver. 3) of a series of such acts. Both 
are middle, while cmoypafao-Oai in ver. i is probably passive. 
We must not take o-vv Mapta^t with aTroypctyracrtfac ; it belongs to 
avlfirj. It is essential to the narrative that she should go up with 
with him ; not so that she should be enrolled with him. In a 
Roman census women paid the poll-tax, but were not obliged to 


come in person. That Mary had property in Bethlehem is a con- 
jecture which is almost disproved by her resourcelessness in the 
place. And if it was necessary for her to come, because she also 
was of David's line, would not Lk. have written &a TO elvai afiroOs 
cf OIKOV K. IT. A. ? This reading is found in Syr-Sin. : " because 
they were both of the house of D." It is futile to argue that a 
woman in her condition would not have gone unless she was com- 
pelled, therefore Lk. represents her as beirg compelled: there- 
fore he has made a mistake. She would be anxious at all risks 
not to be separated from Joseph. Lk. does not even imply that 
her presence was obligatory ; and, if he had said that it was, we 
do not know enough about the matter to say whether he would 
have been wrong. Had there been a law which required her to 
remain at home, then Lk. might be suspected of an error. For 
<TUP see on i. 56. 

nf fjm]OTeujj^nf] aurcu, offenj eyicuw. The ywaiKt of A, Vulg. 
Syr. and Aeth. is a gloss, but a correct one. Had she been only 
his betrothed (i. 27; Mt i. 18), their travelling together would 
have been impossible. But by omitting yuvai/a Lk. intimates 
what Mt states i. 25. The ovvy introduces, not a mere fact, but 
the reason for what has just been stated. Not, he had her with 
him, and she happened to be with child ; but, he took her with 
him, " because she was with child," After what is related Mt i. 19 
he would not leave her at this crisis. See on i. 24. 

6, 7. The Birth of the Saviour at Bethlehem. The Gospel of 
Pseudo-Matthew (xiii.) represents the birth as taking place before 
Bethlehem is reached. So also apparently the Protevangelium of 
James (xvil), which limits the decree of Augustus to those who 
lived at Bethlehem ! For firX^aOqaui' see on i. 15 and 57. 

7. roy vibv auTTJs T&I> irpwrcSroKOF. The expression might 
certainly be used without implying that there had been subsequent 
children. But it implies the possibility of subsequent children, 
and when Luke wrote this possibility had been decided. Would 
he have used such an expression if it was then known that Mary 
had never had another child? He might have avoided aU 
ambiguity by writing /xovoyo^T/, as he does vii. 12, viii. 42, ix. 38. 
In considering this question the imperf. eyH/oxr/cev (Mt i. 25) has 
not received sufficient attention. See Mayor, Ep. of St. fames, 
pp. xix-xxii. 

etnrapY<i'wo-K aMv. It has been inferred from her being able 
to do this that the birth was miraculously painless (rip avu&ww 
Kvrjo-iv, Euthym.), of which there is no hint For tne verb comp. 
o/jLixXy avrty l<nrapydv<o<ra, "I made thick darkness a swaddling 
band for it" (Job xxxviii. 9). 

iv 4><iTi/T). The traditional rendering "in a manger" is right j 
not "a stall" either here or in xiii. is. The animals were out at 


pasture, and the manger was not being used. Justin (Try. kxviii.) 
and some of the apocryphal gospels say that it was in a cave, which 
is not improbable. In Origen's time the cave was shown, and the 
manger also (Con. Cels. i. 51). One suspects that the cave may 
be a supposed prophecy turned into history, like the vine in xix. 31. 
Is. XXXili. 1 6 (ovros ot/c^CTt V vi/rtyAoJ cmyAatfc) Trerpas 6;^v/>a$) was 
supposed to point to birth in a cave, and then the cave may have 
been imagined in order to fit it, just as the colt is represented as 
"tied to a vine" in order to make Gen. xlix. n a prediction of 
Lk. xix. 30-33 (Justin, Apol. i. 32). 

OUK \v aurois TOTTOS & TW KaTaXu'fuiTi. Most of the Jews then 
residing in Palestine were of Judah or Benjamin, and all towns 
and villages of Judah would be very full. No inhospitality is 
implied. It is a little doubtful whether the familiar translation 
"in the inn" is correct. In x. 34 "inn" is TravSox^ov, and in 
xxii. ii KaraXv/jLo. is not "inn." It is possible that Joseph had 
relied upon the hospitality of some friend in Bethlehem, whose 
"guest-chamber," however, was already full when he and Mary 
imved. See on xxii. n. But mraXv/ia in LXX represents five 
different Heb. words, so that it must have been elastic in meaning. 
All that it implies is a place where burdens are loosed and let 
down for a rest. In Polybius it occurs twice in the plural : of 
the general's quarters (ii. 36. i), and of reception rooms for envoys 
(xxxu. 19 2). It has been suggested that the "inn" was the 
Geruth Chimham or "lodging-place of Chimham " (Jer. xli. 17), 
the [son] of Barzillai (2 Sam. xix. 37, 38), "which was by 
Bethlehem," and convenient for those who would "go to enter into 
Egypt." See Stanley, Sin. 6* Pal. pp. 163, 529. Justin says 
that the cave was <rweyyvs TT/S KCO/I^S, which agrees with "by 
Bethlehem." The Mandra of Josephus (Ant. x. 9. 5) was perhaps 
the same place as Geruth Chimham. 

8-14. The Angelic Proclamation to the Shepherds: 7rro>x<H 
vayyeAt'oyrat (vii. 22). It was in these pastures that David spent 
his youth and fought the lion and the bear (i Sam. xvii. 34, 35). 
" A passage in the Mishnah (Shek. vii. 4 ; comp. Baba K. vii. 7, 
80 a) leads to the conclusion that the flocks which pastured there 
were destined for Temple -sacrifices, and accordingly, that the 
shepherds who watched over them were not ordinary shepherds. 
The latter were under the ban of Rabbinism on account of their 
necessary isolation from religious ordinances and their manner of 
life, which rendered strict religious observance unlikely, if not 
absolutely impossible. The same Mischnic passage also leads us 
to infer that these flocks lay out all the year round^ since they are 
spoken of as in the fields thirty days before the Passover that is, 
in the month of February, when in Palestine die average rainfall is 
nearly greatest " (Edersh. L. <&- 71 i. pp. 186, 187). For details of 


the life of a shepherd see D.B. art " Shepherds/' and Herzog, 
PRE? art. " Viehzucht itnd Hirtenleten." 

8* dypauXourrcs- Making the dypo's their auXiJ, and so " spend- 
ing their life in the open air* 7 : a late and rare word, whereas 
ay/oavAos is class. This statement is by no means conclusive 
against December as the time of the year. The season may have 
been a mild one; it is not certain that all sheep were brought 
under cover at night during the winter months. 

It is of the flocks in the wilderness , far from towns or villages, that the often 
quoted saying was true, that they were taken out in March and brought home 
in November. These shepherds may have returned from the wilderness, and if 
so, the time would be between November and March. But the data for 
determining the time of year are so very insufficient, that after minute calculation 
of them aU we are left in our original uncertainty. Among those who have 
made a special study of the question we have advocates for almost every month 
in the year. The earliest attempts to fix the day of which we have knowledge 
are those mentioned (and apparently condemned as profane curiosity) by 
Clement of Alexandria (Strom. L 21 sub fin.). In his time some took April 21, 
others April 22, and others May 20, to be the day. What was unknown in his 
tame is not likely to have been discovered afterwards respecting such a detail 
December 25th cannot be traced higher than the fourth century, and it seems to 
have been adopted first hi the West. We must be content to remain m 
ignorance as to the date of the birth of Christ. See on tyij/JLeplas i. 5 ; D. of 
Chr. Ant., art. "Christmas'*; Andrews, Z. ofourLord> pp. 12-21, ed. 1892. 

<|>u\<{(ro-orrs <|>uXaft<s. The plural refers to their watching in 
turns rather than in different places. The phrase occurs Num. 
viii. 26; Xen. Anab. ii. 6. 10; but in LXX rets faXaKas <j>v\. is 
more common; Num. iiL 7, 8, 28, 32, 38, etc. Comp. Plat 
Ph&dr. 240 E; Laws> 758 D. The fondness of Lk. for such 
combinations of cognate words is seen again ver. 9, vii. 29, 
xvh. 24, xxii. 15, and several times in the Acts. See on xL 46 and 
xxiii. 46. We may take -njs vwcros after <vXaic(fe, "night-watches," 
or as gen. of time, " by night" 

9. ayycXos Kupiou errAmj ofirots. The notion of coming 
suddenly is not inherent in the verb, but is often derived from the 
context : see on ver. 3& 1 In N.T. the verb is almost peculiar to 
Lk., and almost always in 2nd aor. In class. Grk. also it is used 
of the appearance of heavenly beings, dreams, visions, etc. Horn. 
//. x. 496, xxui. 106 ; Hdt L 34. 2, viL 14. i. Comp. Lk. xxiv. 4; 
Acts xii. 7, xxiii. n. 

86ga Kupiou. The heavenly brightness which is a sign of the 
presence of God or of heavenly beings, 2 Cor. iii. 18 : comp. Lk 
ix. 31, 32. In O.T. of the Shechinah, Exod. xvL 7, 10, xxiv. 17, 

1 In Vulg. it is very variously translated: e.g. stare fuxta (here), supervmirt 
(ii. 38, xxi. 34), stare (iv. 39, x. 40, rev. 4), convemre (xx. i), concurrtri 
(Acts vL 12), adstarg (Acts x. 17, Ik II, xu. 7), adsistere (Acts wii. 5, 
ll), immintre (Acts xxviu. 4) 


xl 34 ; Lev. ix. 6, 23 j Num. xii. 8, etc. This glory, according to 
the Jews, was wanting in the second temple. 

10. 6 ayyeXos. The art. is used of that which has been mentioned before 
without the art Comp. ri pptyos and rj Qdrro in ver. 16. 

M?) 4>opi0-0e. Cpmp. L 13, 30, v. 10 ; Mt xiv. 27, xxviiL 5, lo. 1 
For ISoO y<p see on L 44. 

uayye\to|i,ai tfjuK x a P&f ficydXiji'. The verb is very freq, in 
Lk. and Paul, but is elsewhere rare; not in the other Gospels 
excepting Mt xi. 5, which is a quotation. See on i, 19. 

The act occurs Rev. x. 7, xiv. 6 ; the pass. Lk. vii 22, xvL 16 ; Gal. 
i. II ; Heb. iv. 2, 6; i Pet L 25, iv. 6; the mid. is freq. with various 
constructions. As here, dat. of pers. and ace. of thing, i. 19, iv. 43 ; Acts 
viii. 35 ; ace. of thing only, viu". i ; Acts v. 42, vui. 4, 12 ; ace, of person, 
iii. 18 ; Acts viii. 25, 40 ; ace. of person and of thing, Acts xiii. 32. 

eorai iram TW Xaw. " Which shall have the special char- 
acter of being for all the people." The ijris has manifest point here 
(see on ver. 4) ; and the art before Aa<3 should be preserved. A 
joy so extensive may well banish fear. Comp, T$ AaoJ, i. 68, 77, 
and rbv AaoV, vii. 16. In both these verses (9, 10) we have instances 
of Lk. recording intensity of emotion : comp. i. 42, viii. 37, 
xxiv. 52 ; Acts v. 5, n, xv. 3. Dat. after dpi is freq. in Lk. 

11. Ir^n fyi" <rfyepoi> o-wT^p. To the shepherds, as a part, 
and perhaps a specially despised part, of the people of Israel. 
Here first in N.T. is vwyp used of Christ, and here only in Lk. 
Not in Mt or Mk., and only once in Jn. (iv. 42) : twice in Acts 
(v. 31, xiii. 23), and freq. in Tit and 2 Pet The ist aor. of TIKTCO, 
both act. and pass., is rare : see Veitch. 

Xpurros icrfpios. The combination occurs nowhere else in N.T., 
and the precise meaning is uncertain. Either " Messiah, Lord," or 
"Anointed Lord," or "the Messiah, the Lord," or "an anointed 
one, a Lord." It occurs once in LXX as a manifest mistranslation. 
Lam. iv. 20, "The breath of our nostrils, the anointed of the 
Lord," is rendered nvtvp.a wpoo-owrou rj^Stv Xpiords KV/HOS. If this 
is not a corrupt reading, we may perhaps infer that the expres- 
sion X/Mcrrds /cuptos was familiar to the translator. It occurs 
in the Ps. Sol., where it is said of the Messiah KOI otwc mv 
aSt,Kia & T(us ^ju-epats avrov cv /J-ecnp avrfiv, an Travrcs dytot, Ka! 
/Jao-tXeus avraJv Xpioros icvptos (xvii. 36 : comp, the title of xviii.). 
But this may easily be another mistranslation, perhaps based on 

1 " This Gospel of Luke is scarce begun, we are yet but a little way in the 
second chapter, and we have already three noli timeres in it, and all, as here, 
at the coming of an Angel (i. 13, 30, ii. 10). . . . What was it? It was not 
the fear of an evil conscience ; they were about no harm. . , . It is a plain 
sign our nature is fallen from her original ; Heaven and we are not in the terms 
we should be, not the best of us all" (Bishop Andrewes, Serm. K On th* 


that in Lam. iv. 20. Comp. ewrev 6 Kvpios TO> Kvpiu po\ (Ps. ex. i), 
and 7TKaA.e<ra/tf7v Kvpiov irartpa Kvplov pov (Ecclus. li. 10). See 
Ryle and James, JPs. of Sol. pp. 141-143. The addition of iv 
iroXci AauciS here indicates that this crwnjp is the King of Israel 
promised in the Prophets : see on ver. 4. 

12. Kal TOUTO uplv rd (njjutctoK. B B omit the TO. Sign for what ? 
By which to prove that what is announced is true, rather than by 
which to find the Child. It was all-important that they should be 
convinced as to the first point ; about the other there would be no 
great difficulty. eSp^o-erc Pp^4>os. "Ye shall find a babe," "not 
the babe," as most English Versions and Luther; Wiclif has "a 
yunge child." This is the first mention of it; in ver. 16 the art is 
right. In N.T., as in class. Grk., /?/>e'$os is more often a newly- 
born child (xviii. 15; Acts viL 19; 2 Tim. iiL 15; i Pet ii. 2) than 
an unborn child (Lk. i. 41, 44); in LXX it is always the former 
(i Mac. i. 61 ; 2 Mac. vi. 10; 3 Mac. v. 49 ; 4 Mac. iv. 25), unless 
Ecclus. xix. ii be an exception. Aquila follows the same usage 
(Ps. viii. 3, xvi. 14; Is. Ixv. 20). coTrapyai'WfjL^o^ ical Kelpevov iv 
^d-rvj). Both points are part of the sign. The first participle is 
no more an adjective than the second. No art with <f>a.Tvy : the 
shepherds have not heard of it before. 

13. ^cfrnjs. 1 The fact that this is expressly stated here 
confirms the view that suddenness is not necessarily included in 
cv(rn7 (ver. 9). For <rbv TW dyy&w see on i. 56. orpaTias. Magna 
appellatio. Hie exercitus tamen pacem laudat (Beng.). The 
genitive is partitive : " a multitude (no art.) forming part of the 
host" Comp. i Kings xxii. 19; 2 Chron. xviii. 18; Ps. ciii. 21; 
Josh. v. 15). alvourruv. Constr* ad sensum. The whole host 
of heaven was praising God, not merely that portion of it which 
was visible to the shepherds. The verb is a favourite with Lk. 
(ver. 20, xix. 37, xxiv. 53?; Acts ii. 47, iii. 8, 9). Elsewhere 
only Rom. xv. iz (from Ps. cxvii. i) and Rev. xix. 5; very freq. 
in LXX. 

14. Aofa . . . eJSojuas. The hymn consists of two members 
connected by a conjunction ; and the three parts of the one mem- 
ber exactly correspond with the three parts of the other member. 

GLORY to God in the highest^ 
And on earth PEACE among men of His good wilL 
Aoa balances tlpywi, & v\l/t<rroi,$ balances li&yfjs, e<j> balances IK 
foQpwiroi's euSo/cias. This exact correlation between the parts is 
lost in the common triple arrangement; which has the further 
awkwardness of having the second member introduced by a con- 

1 The word is thus written in the best texts here and ix. 39 : comp. tyyffcot t 
xri. 34 ; iceptap, XVL 17 ; Kpcrdty, xad. 34 (WH. App. pp. 150, 151). In class. 
Grk. evpdvM is of three terminations ; but the true reading here may be ovfAvrt 


junction, 1 while the third is not, and of making the second and 
third members tautological. " On earth peace " is very much the 
same as " Good will amongst men." Yet Scrivener thinks that " in 
the first and second lines heaven and earth are contrasted; the 
third refers to both those preceding, and alleges the efficient cause 
which has brought God glory and earth peace " (Int. to Crit. of 
JW.T.n.p. 344) ; which seems to be very forced. The construction 
Iv avOptotrois voWV<? is difficult ; but one of the best of modern Greek 
scholars has said that it " may be translated ' among men of His 
counsel for good ' or ' of His gracious purpose.' .This rendering 
seems to be in harmony with the preceding context and with the 
teaching of Scripture in general" (T. S. Evans, Contemp. Rev^ 
Dec. 1 88 1, p. 1003). WH take a similar view. They prefer, 
among possible meanings, " in (among and within) accepted man- 
kind," and point out that "the Divine 'favour' (Ps. xxx. 5, 7, 
Ixxxv. i, Ixxxix. 17, cvi. 4) or 'good pleasure,' declared for the 
Head of the race at the Baptism (iii. 22), was already contemplated 
by the Angels as resting on the race itself in virtue of His birth " 
(ii. App. p. 56, where the whole discussion should be studied). 
H. suggests that the first of the two clauses should end with Iwl 
ys rather than e$, and that we should arrange thus . " Glory 
to God in the highest and on earth; Peace among men of His 
good pleasure." With the construction of this first clause he com- 
pares vii. 17 and Acts xxvi. 23 : " Glory to God not only in heaven, 
but now also on earth." " In this arrangement c glory ' and ' peace ' 
stand severally at the head of the two clauses as twin fruits of the 
Incarnation, that which redounds to ' God ' and that which enters 
into * men.' " This division of the clauses, previously commended 
by Olshausen, makes the stichometry as even as in the familiar 
triplet, but it has not found many supporters. It destroys the 
exact correspondence between the parts of the two clauses, the 
first ckuse having three or four parts, and the second only two. 
W. here leaves H. to plead alone. 

cuSofctas. The word has three meanings : (i) " design, desire," 
as Ecclus. xi. 17; Rom. x. i ; (2) "satisfaction, contentment," as 
Ecclus. xxxv. 14; 2 Thes. i. n ; (3) "benevolence, goodwill," as 
Ps. cvi. 4 ; Lk. ii. 14. Both it and cvSo/cetv are specially used of 
the favour with which God regards His elect, as Ps. cxlvL 12; 
Lk. iii. 22. The meaning here is " favour, goodwill, good pleasure" j 
and #v0/oo>7roi cuSoKias are "men whom the Divine favour has 
blessed." See Lft. on Phil. i. 15. Field (Otium Noru. iii. p. #) 
urges that, according to Graeco-biblical usage, this would be, not 
cMpcjiroi evBoKias, but a>8ps cuoW'as, and he appeals to nine ex- 
amples in LXX. But two-thirds of them are not in point, being 
singulars, and having reference to a definite adult male and not to 
1 Syr-Sin, inserts a second "and" before "goodwill to man*" 


human beings in general. These are 2 Sam. xvi 7, xviii. 20; Ps. 
Ixxx. 18; Jer. xv. 10; ibid. Aq.j Dan. x. n. There remain avSpes 

v, Ps. cxix. 24, Aq. ; ot avSpes rJys SiaQiJKiis crov, Obad. 7; 

viKot crov, Obad. 7. This last is again not parallel, as being 
accompanied by an adj. and not a gen. Substitute dvSpcs at/wtVcov, 
Ps. cxxxviii. 19. Of these instances, all necessarily refer to adult 
males, excepting Aq. in Ps. cxix. 24, and this more naturally does 
so, for "counsellors" are generally thought of as male. But, 
allowing that the usual expression would have been dvSpaeriv 
eu8o/a'as, this might well have been avoided here in order to em- 
phasize the fact that all, male and female, young and old, are 
included. Even in the case of an individual S. Paul writes 6 & 
LOTTOS -rijs avo/uas (2 Thes. ii. 3), so that the combination is at 
anyrate possible. See on Rom. x. i, 

The reading is a well-known problem, but the best textual critics arc 
unanimous for e&Soiclas. The internal evidence is very evenly balanced, ai 
regards both transcnptional and intrinsic probabilities, which are well stated 
and estimated in WH. (IL App pp. 55, 56). The external evidence is very 
decidedly in favour of the apparently more difficult reading e&Soidas. Roughly 
speaking, we have all the best MSS. (excepting C, which is here defective), 
with all Latin authorities, against the inferior MSS., with nearly all versions, 
except the Latin, and nearly all the Greek writers who quote the text. Syr- 
Sin, has " and goodwill to men.*' 

For etdoKtas, K* A B D, Latt. (Vet. Vulg.) Goth. Iren-Lat Orig-Lat 
and the Lat. Gloria in txcelsis. 

For evdoKla, LPTAAjal, etc,, Syrr. (Pesh. Sin. Hard.) Boh. Arm. 
Aeth. Orig. Eus. Bas. Greg-Naz. Cyr-Hier. Did. Epiph. Cyr-Alex. 

" The agreement, not only of tf with B, but of D and all the Latins with 
both, and of A with them all, supported by Ongen in at least one work, and 
that in a certified text, affords a peculiarly strong presumption in favour of 
cvSoiclas. If this reading is wrong, it must be Western ; and no other reading 
in the New Testament open to suspicion as Western is so comprehensively 
attested by the earliest and best uncials " (WH. p. 54). The vehemence with 
which Scrivener argues against fvSoKtas is quite out of place. 

15-20. The Verification by the Shepherds. 

15. eXdXouy irpos dXXVjXous Ai&0o>|i,6i> Stj. "They repeatedly 
said unto one another, Come then let us go over," or " Let us at 
once go across." The compound verb refers to the intervening 
country (Acts ix. 38, xi. 19, xviii. 27), and the By makes the 
exhortation urgent. Lk. is fond of SiepxecrQai, which occurs thirty 
times in his writings and less than ten elsewhere in N.T. In LXX 
it is very freq. Note d> 5 = " when." 

T& f&fjp.a TOOTO. This need not be limited to the saying of the 
Angel It is rather the thing of which he spoke : see on L 65. In 
class. Grk. Xoyos is used in a similar manner; ^. Hdt. L 21. a. 
Videamus hoc verbum quodjactum est (Vulg.). 

16. 4jX0av <T7TvravTcs ical avaipav. For these mixed forms of die moc. 
ee on i. 59. Lk. alone in N.T. uses <rrev5eu> in its class, intrans. vinse ( 


5, 6 ; Acts xx. 16, xxii. 18). In 2 Pet iii. 12 it is intrans. as in Is. xvi. 5. 
Lk. alone uses foevpLffKew (Acts xxi. 4), but the mid. occurs 4 Mac. in. 14, 
2nd aor. in all three cases. The compound implies a search in order to find. 
In his Gospel Lk. never uses re without Kat (xn. 45, xv. 2, xxi. II, etc.). 
Here both flptyos and Qdrrg, having been mentioned before, have the article. 

17. iyvdpurw. " They made known," not merely to Mary and 
Joseph, but to the inhabitants of Bethlehem generally. Both in 
N.T. and LXX yvco/H&o is commonly trans. ; but in Phil. i. 22 and 
Job xxxiv. 25, as usually in class. Grk., it is intrans. Vulg. makes 
it intrans. here : cognoverunt de verbo quod dictum erat illis de fuero 
hoc. But ver. 14 makes this very improbable. 

18. irdrres ot dKorfoui/Tcs. See on i. 66. This probably includes 
subsequent hearers, just as ver. 19 includes a time subsequent to the 
departure of the shepherds. The constr. 0aup,curai> ircpi is unusuaL 
But in English " about," which is common after " perplexed," might 
easily be transferred to such a word as "astonished." 

19. \ 8e Mapta irdira owTi]pi T& p^ftara rauTo. " But Mary " 
could have no such astonishment; neither did she publish her 
impressions. The revelations to Joseph and herself precluded 
both. Note the change from momentary wonder (aor.) to sus- 
tained reticence (imperf.) : also that iravra is put before the verb 
with emphasis. Comp. Dan. vii. 28; Ecclus. xxxix. 2. owj3<XXouo-a 
lv TJJ KapSta afirTJs. Conferens in corde suo. From whom could 
Lk. learn this? The verb is peculiar to him (xiv. 31 ; Acts iv. 15 ; 
xviL 1 8, xviii. 27, xx. 14). See small print note on i. 66. 

2<X SogdJoKres K<U alyoun-es. The latter is the more definite 
word. The former is one of the many words which have acquired 
a deeper meaning in bibl. Grk. Just as Sofa in bibl. Grk. never 
(except 4 Mac. v. 18) has the class, meaning of "opinion," but 
rather " praise " or " glory," so So ao> in bibl. Grk. never means 
" form an opinion about," but " praise " or " glorify." It is used 
of the honour done by man to man (i Sam. xv, 30), by man to God 
(Exod. xv. 2), and by God to man (Ps. xci. 15). It is also used of 
God glorifying Christ (Acts iii. 13), a use specially common in Jn. 
(viii. 54, xi. 4, etc.), and of Christ gloryfying God (xvii. 4). See 
on Rom. i. 21. For the combination comp. alverbv K<U 8e8oa<r- 
fjLcvov (Dan. iii. 26, 55). For aim? see on ver. 13. 

irao-ii' 015. For the attraction see on iii. 19. If ^nouo-ay refers 
to the angelic announcement, then ica0c5s refers to cISo^ only. But 
^Kovarav ical elSov may sum up their experiences at Bethlehem, 
which were a full confirmation (/caflois = " even as, just as ") of what 
the Angel had said. 

Schleiennacher points out that, if this narrative had been a mere poetical 
composition, we should have had the hymn of the shepherds recorded and more 
extensive hymns assigned to the Angels (S. Luke, Eng. tr. p. 31). He regards 
the shepherds as the probable source of the narrative j " for that which to them 
was most material and obvious, the nocturnal vision in the fields, is the only 


drcumsUnce treated in detail " (p. 33). But any narrator would give the vision, 
and could hardly give it more briefly without material loss. The brevity of it, 
especially when contrasted with the apocryphal gospels, is strong guarantee for 
its truth. How tempting to describe the search for the Babe and the conversa- 
tion between the parents and the shepherds 1 Of the myth-hypothesis Weiss 
rightly says that "it labours in vain to explain the part played here by the 
shepherds by means of the pastoral tales of the ancients, and is driven to diag 
in, awkwardly enough, the legends of Cyrus and Romulus " (Lebenjesu, i. 2. 
4, note, Eng. tr. p. 255). As for the old rationalism, which explained the 
angelic vision by ignis fatmts or other phosphoric phenomena, which travellers 
have said to be common in those parts ; "the more frequent such phenomena, 
the more familiar must shepherds above all men, accustomed to pass their nights 
the whole summer long in the open air, have been with them, and the less likely 
to consider them as a sign from heaven pointing at a particular event" 
(Schleierm. p. 36). 

21-40. The Circumcision and the Presentation in the Temple. 

This forms the third and last section in the second group of 
narratives (i. 57-11. 40) in the Gospel of the Infancy (i. 5~iL 52). 
It corresponds to the Visitation (i. 39-56) in the first group. Its 
very marked conclusion has close resemblance to i. 80 and ii. 52. 
See introductory note to w. 1-20 (p. 46). The absence of parallel 
passages in the other Gospels shows that at first this portion of the 
Gospel narrative was less well known. An oral tradition respect- 
ing the childhood of the Christ (when hardly anyone suspected that 
He was the Christ) would be much less likely to arise or become 
prevalent than an oral tradition respecting the ministry and cruci- 
fixion. We can once more trace a threefold division, viz. a longer 
narrative between two very short ones : the Circumcision (21), the 
Presentation in the Temple (22-38), and the Return to Home Life 
at Nazareth (39, 40). 

21. The Circumcision. The verse contains an unusual number 
of marks of Lk.'s style, i. Kcu OTC (w. 22, 42, vi 13, xxii. 14, 
xxiii. 33); 2 - ir^yOtw (twenty-two times in Lk. and Acts, and 
thrice elsewhere in N.T.) ; see on L 57 ; 3. TOV c. infin. to express 
aim or purpose (i. 74, 77, 79, ii. 24, iv. 10, v. 7, viii. 5, etc.); 
see on L 74; 4. /cat introducing the apodosis (v i, 12, 17, vii. 12, 
ix. 51, etc.); 5. crvXXapfidvciv (eleven times in Lk. and Acts, and 
five times elsewhere). See on v. i. 

21. TOO TrcpiT[ieii> aMv. There being no art with fjpcpai 
(contrast ver. 22), we cannot, as in ver. 6 and L 57, make the gen. 
depend on a! ^epai or 6 xpovos. The OKTCO does not take the 
place of the art. As Jesus was sent "in the likeness of sinful 
flesh" (Rom. viii. 3), and "it behoved Him in all things to be 
made like unto His brethren" (Heb. ii. 17), He underwent cir- 
cumcision. He was "born under the law" (Gal. iv. 4), and ful- 
filled the law as a loyal son of Abraham. Had He not done so, 
owe av oXo>s irapeS2(0i7 StSacr/ccov, aXA.' aTronrejuftGii) av <i 


(Euthym ) His circumcision was a first step in His obedience to 
the will of God, and a first shedding of the redeeming blood. It 
was one of those things which became Him, in order " to fulfil all 
righteousness" (Mt. lii. 15). The contrast with the circumcision 
of the Baptist is marked. Here there is no family gathering of 
rejoicing neighbours and kinsfolk* Joseph and Mary are strangers 
in a village far from home. 

The reading r& vatSiop (D E G H) for *Mf (tf A B R E and versions) prob- 
ably arose from this being the beginning of a lection, " Him " being changed 
to "the child" (AV.) for greater clearness. The same land of thing has 
been done at the beginning of many of the Gospels in the Book of Common 
Prayer, "Jesus" being substituted for "He" or "Him": <?.#. the Gospels 
for the 6th, 9th, nth, 1 2th, i6th, i8th, igth, and 22nd Sundays after 

ita! cKX^Oi). The Koi is almost our "then" and the German 
da : but it may be left untranslated. It introduces the apodosis, 
as often in Grk., and esp. in Lk. This is simpler than to explain 
it as a mixture of two constructions, " When eight days were fill- 
filled ... He was called" and "Eight days were fulfilled . . . 
and He was called" (Win. liii. 3. f, p. 546, Ixv. 3. c, p. 756), 
Comp. Acts i. 10. "He was also called" is not likely to be right. 
The Vulgate and Luther are right ILt postquam consummati sunt 
dies octo ut circumcideretur vocatum est nomen ejus Jesus. Und da 
acht Tage urn waren, dass das Kind beschnitten wurde^ da wardsein 
Name genannt Jesus. This passage, with that about John the Baptist 
(i. 59), is the chief biblical evidence that naming was connected 
with circumcision : comp. Gen. xvu. 5, 10. Among the Romans 
the naming of girls took place on the eighth day : of boys on the 
ninth. The purification accompanied it ; and hence the name dies 
lustricus. Tertullian uses noimnalia of the naming festival (IdoL 
xvi. i). Among the Greeks the naming festival was on the tenth 

day ; SeKarrjv <TTLav or 6vtv. 

i This and corresponding forms, such as X^U^OAUU, x/xww- 
and the like, are abundantly attested in good MSS. both of LXX 
and of N.T. See on 131. /e o t X / a = " womb " is specially freq. in Lk. 

22-38. The Purification and the Presentation in the Temple, 
Here also we have a triplet. The Ceremony (22-24); Symeon 
and the Nunc Dimittis(25-35); and Anna the Prophetess (36-38). 
Symeon and Anna, like Zacharias and Elisabeth, with those spoken 
of in ver. 38, are evidence that Judaism was still a living religion 
to those who made the most of their opportunities. 

22. at Tjjj^pat TOO K. Lev. xii. 6. Lk. is fond of these peri- 
phrases, which are mostly Hebraistic. Comp. Tjpepa TWV 


TCDV (iv. 1 6), or row o-a/?/Mr<w (xiiL 14, 16, xiv. 5), ^ qpepa rfir 
ov/ov (xxii 7), and the like. 

TOU KaOapio-jioG aurw. "Of their purification." The Jewish 
law (Lev. xiL) did not include the child in the purification. This 
fact, and the feeling that least of all could Jesus need purifying, 
produced the corrupt reading avrijs, followed in AV. 

No uncial and perhaps only one cursive (76) supports the reading avrTjt, 
which spread from the Complutensian Polyglott Bible (1514) to a number of 
editions. It is a remarkable instance of a reading which had almost no 
authority becoming widely adopted. It now has the support of Syr-Sin. 
The Complutensian insertion of faijpQp&dri after ij 7A<2<r<ra ay'rov in i. 64 was 
less successful, although that has the support of two cursives (140, 251). 
D here has the strange reading at/rod, which looks like a slip rather than a 
correction. No one would alter avrQv to aurou. The Vulgate also has 
purgationis ejus^ but some Lat MSS. have eorum. The aur^y might come 
from LXX of Lev. xii. 6, Srav &vav\7ip<a8Q<rw al r/^pcu KaBdpveus aur^j. 
Note that Lk. uses Ka0apto>i<5s and not *d0a/xr, which is a medical term for 
menstruation, and which Gentile readers might misunderstand* 

The meaning of awoiv is not dear. Edersheim and Van Hengel 
interpret it of the Jews ; Godet, Meyer, and Weiss of Mary and 
Joseph. The latter is justified by the context : " When the days 
of their purification were fulfilled . . . they brought Him." Con- 
tact with an unclean person involved undeanness. Purification 
after childbirth seems to have been closely connected with purifica- 
tion after menstruation; the rites were similar. Herzog, PRE? 
art Reinigungen. After the birth of a son the mother was undean 
for seven days, then remained at home for thirty-three days, and on 
the fortieth day after the birth made her offerings. 

Kara TOC vfyw Maniacs. These words must be taken with what 
precedes, for the law did not require them to bring Him to Jeru- 
salem (Lev. xii 1-8). We have already had several places in 
ch. L (pv. 8, 25, 27) in which there are amphibolous words or 
phrases: comp. viii 39, ix. 17, 18, 57, x. 18, xi. 39, xii. i, xvii. 22, 
xviii. 31, xix, 37, xxi. 36, etc. 

The trisyllabic form MonJo^y is to be preferred to Mc*ri?. The name it 
aid to be derived from two Egyptian words, mo = " water," and ugca = " to 
be preserved." Hence the LXX, a version made in Egypt, and the best 
MSS. of the N.T., which in the main represent the text of the N.T. that was 
current in Egypt, keep nearest to the Egyptian form of the name by preserving 
the v. Josephus also has Mwucr^y. But Mown}? is closer to the Hebrew form 
of the name, and is the form most commonly used by Greek and Latin writers* 
Win. v. 8, p. 47. 

A^yayoK. One of Lk.'s favourite words (iv. 5, viil 22, and 
often in Acts). It is here used of bringing Him up to the capita^ 
like ava/3aw6vr<i>v in ver. 43. In the literal sense they went down\ 
for Bethlehem stands higher than Jerusalem. This journey is the 
first visit of the Christ to His own city. 


'lepoo-oXuua. In both his writings Lk. much more often uses 
the Jewish form 'Icpouo-aA^'/z, (w. 25, 38, 41, 43, 45, etc.), which 
Mt uses only once (xxiii. 37), and Mk. perhaps not at all (? xi. i). 
Jn, uses the Greek form in his Gospel, and the Jewish form in the 
Apocalypse. The Jewish form is used wherever the name is not 
a geographical term, but has a specially religious signification (GaL 
iv. 25 ; Heb. xii. 22). The Greek form is neut plur. In Mt. ii. 3 
it may be fern.; but perhaps Tracra. ^ iroAis was in the writer's mind 
Neither form should have the aspirate, which a " false association 
with Upo's" has produced (WH. ii. 313; App. p. 160). This visit 
to Jerusalem probably preceded the arrival of the Magi, after which 
Joseph and Mary would hardly have ventured to bring Him to the 
city. If this is correct, we must abandon the traditional view that 
the Epiphany took place on the thirteenth day after the Nativity. 
There is no improbability in Joseph's going back to Bethlehem 
for a while before returning to Nazareth. See Andrews, Life of our 
Lord) p. 92, ed. 1892; Swete, The Apostlef Creed^ p. 50, ed. 1894. 

In any case the independence of Mt. and Lk. is manifest, for we do not 
know how to harmonize the accounts. Lk. seems to imply that " the law of 
Moses " was kept in all particulars ; and if so, the purification did not take 
pkce before the fortieth day. Mt. implies that the flight into Egypt took 
place immediately after the visit of the Magi (ii. 14). As Bethlehem is so 
close to Jerusalem, Herod would not wait long for the return of the Magi 
before taking action. We adopt, therefore, as a tentative order the Presenta- 
tion on the fortieth day, Return to Bethlehem, Visit of the Magi, Flight into 
Egypt, without any return to Nazareth. 

iropcwrnjom TW Kupiw. The Heb. verb in Ex. xiii. 12 means 
" cause to pass over." It is elsewhere used of parents causing their 
children to pass through the fire in offering them to Moloch, but is 
not then translated by irapioryfu (Deut xviiL 10; 2 Kings xvi. 3, 
xvii. 17, xxiii. 10, etc.). For irapa<rrij<rai of offering to God comp. 
Rom. xii. i. This Trapaor-rijom r<3 Kvply is quite distinct from the 
purification, which concerned the mother, whereas the presentation 
concerned the son. It is evident that the presentation is the main 
fact here. Not, " she came to offer a sacrifice," but "they brought 
Him up to present Him to the Lord," is the principal statement 
The latter rite points back to the primitive priesthood of all first- 
born sons. Their functions had been transferred to the tribe of 
Levi (Num. lii. 12); but every male firstborn had to be redeemed 
from service in the sanctuary by a payment of five shekels (Num. 
xviii. 15, 1 6), as an acknowledgment that the rights of Jehovah 
had not lapsed. This sum would be about twelve shillings accord- 
ing to the present worth of that amount of silver, but in purchasing 
power would be nearly double that 

3, The quotation (which is not a parenthesis) is a combination of Ex. 
adu. 2 with Ex. xui. 12, and is not exact with either : icXir)0i{crcrai ay. perhapi 
Comes from Ex. xii. 16 j comp. Lk. L 35. For irav aporev see Gen* viL 23 ; 


Ex. i. 22. The Siavoi-yov fx^rpav seems to be fatal to patristic speculations 
respecting Mary's having given birth to the Christ clauso -utero, and therefore 
painlessly : see on ver. 7. 

Excepting Mk. vii. 34, Stavolyto is peculiar to Lk. (xxiv. 31, 45 ; Acts vii 
56, xvL 14, xvii 3) ; freq. in LXX (Gen. ui. 5, 7 ; Exod. xiii. 15 ; Num. iii 
12, etc.). 

24. TOU Souwu 0ucriaj>. See on L 74, and to the reff. there given 
add v. 7, viii. 5, ix. 51, xii. 42, xxi. 22, xxii. 6, 31, xxiv. 15, 25, 29, 
45. This is Mary's offering for her own purification : it has nothing 
to do with the ransom of the firstborn. The record of the offerings 
is considerable guarantee for the truth of the history. A legend 
would very probably have emphasized the miraculous birth by 
saying that the virgin mother was divinely instructed not to bring 
the customary offerings, which in her case would not be required. 

JcOyos TpuyoVwy. The offering of the poor. It has been argued 
that this is evidence that the Magi had not yet come. But their 
gifts, even if they had already offered them, would not have raised 
Mary's condition from poverty to riches. Only well-to-do people 
offered a lamb and a pigeon. Neither here nor elsewhere in N.T. 
have we any evidence that our Lord or His parents were among 
the abjectly poor. 

" The pigeon and turtle-dove were the only birds enjoined to be offered in 
sacrifice by the law of Moses. In almost every case they were permitted as a 
substitute for those who were too poor to provide a kid or a lamb. . . . But 
while the turtle-dove is a migrant, and can only be obtained from spring to 
autumn, the wild pigeons remain throughout the year ; and not only so they 
have young at all tunes. Consequently, at any time of the year when the turtle- 
dove was unattainable, young pigeons might be procured. There is also a force 
in the adjective * young 3 ; for while the old turtle-dove could be trapped, it was 
hopeless to secure the old pigeon" (Tristram, Nat. Hist, of the B. pp. 211,213). 

25-35* The Benediction of Symeon. He and Anna are repre- 
sentatives of the holiness which, in a time of great spiritual deadnessj 
still survived among the men and women of Israel They are 
instances of that "spontaneous priesthood" which sometimes 
springs up, and often among the lower orders, when the regular 
clergy nave become corrupt and secularized. To identify Symeon 
with any other Symeon is precarious, the name being exceedingly 
common. He is introduced rather as an unknown person (av^owros 
4?v). It is sometimes said that Symeon, son of HiUel and father of 
Gamaliel, would hardly have been old enough; he was president 
of the Sanhedrin A.D. 13. But ver. 29 does not necessarily imply 
that Symeon is very old. What we know of the Sanhednn at this 
period, however, does not lead us to expect to find saints among 
its presidents. In the Gospel of Nicodemus he is called sacerdos 
magnuS) and it is his two sons who are raised from the dead by 
Christ, and reveal what they have seen in Hades (Pars 
A. L). 


25. lv 'lepoucraX^jji. It is remarkable that with one excep 
tion (Rom. xv. 26) this expression is used in N.T. by no one 
but Lk., who has it very often (ver. 43, ix. 31; Acts i. 8, ii. 5, 
vi. 7, ix. 13, 21, x. 39, xiiL 27, xvi. 4, xxi. u). In LXX it is 

uAa|3Vjs. The word is peculiar to Lk. in N.T. (Acts il 5, 
viii. 2, xxii. 12) : lit " taking hold well," and so " cautious." Lat 
timoratus (Vulg.), timens (e), metuens (d), timens deum (r). 
Plutarch uses vAa/?x in the sense of " carefulness about religious 
duties, piety " ; but evXafiys is not thus used in class. Grk. We 
find the combination of these same two adjectives, Swcaios and 
euXa/fy's, twice in Plato's sketch of the ideal statesman. He ought 
to have both moderation and courage ; and of moderation the two 
chief elements are justice and circumspection. If he is merely 
courageous, he will be wanting in TO SLKOUW *ai evAa^cs (Polit. 
311 B). See also Philo, Quis rtr. div. h&r. vi., of the uA.a/?eia of 
Abraham. The meaning of the combination here is that Symeon 
was conscientious, especially in matters of religion. 

rrpoorSexojwi'os (see on xxiii. 51) irapdjcXirjo-iK. i. "Appeal for 
help " ; 2. " encouragement " ; 3. " consolation." The last is the 
meaning here. Those who " sit in darkness and the shadow of 
death" (i. 79) need consolation; and the salvation which the 
Messiah was to bring was specially called such by the Jews. 
Comp. "Comfort ye, comfort ye, My people" (Is. xl. i, xlix. 13, 
li. 3, Ixi. 2, Ixvi. 13). There was a belief that a time of great 
troubles (dolores Messiah) would precede the coming of the Christ 
Hence the Messiah Himself was spoken of as " the Consoler," or 
" the Consolation." Comp. Joseph of Anmathaea, " who was wait- 
ing for the kingdom of God" (xxiii. 51; ML xv. 43); and with 
this "waiting" or "looking" of Symeon and Joseph comp. Jacob's 
death-song, Gen. xlix. 18. 

irycfya \y ay toy. This is the order of the words in the best 
authorities ; and the separation of aytov from Tn/cD/xa by T\V accentu- 
ates the difference between this expression and that in the next 
verse. Here the meaning is, "an influence which was holy was 
upon him"; i. 15, 35, 41, 67 are not parallel. See on i. 15. The 
accusative, ITT' avroy, indicates the coming^ rather than the resting, 
&f the holy influence ; the prophetic impulse. 

26. KcxpTfifiario-jui^o^. The act = i. "transact business" 
(Xpr/jLta); 2. "give a divine response" to one who consults an 
oracle; 3. "give a divine admonition, teach from heaven" (Jer. 
xxv. 30, xxxi. 2; Job xl. 8). The pass, is used both of the 
admonition divinely given, as here, and of the person divinely 
admonished (Mt ii. 12, 22; Acts x. 22; Heb. viii. 5, xi. 7). It is 
gratuitous to conjecture that it was in a dream that the Holy Spirit 
made this known to Symeon. 


JXTJ ISetv 6. irplv ^ &v 18^. This is the only example in N.T. 
with the subj. (Win. xli. 3. b, p. 371) ; and, if the reading is correct, the only 
instance of irplv av : but perhaps either ij or &v should be omitted. The repe- 
tition of "see" is doubtless intentional. In many languages "see" is used 
of any kind of expenence (Acts 11. 27, 31, xiii. 35-37, etc.). 

TOP Xpurrbv Kupiou. " The Anointed of the Lord " ; Him whom 
God has sent as the Messiah. Comp. TOV X/>. TOV eoi? (ix. 20), 
and also i Sam. xxiv. 7. 

27. cVrw nrcu'ijwm. Not "in a state of ecstasy" (Rev. L 10), 
out "under the influence of the Spirit," who had told him of the 
blessing in store for him. By TO UpoV is probably meant the Court 
of the Women. ev TW elcrayayelv. "After they had brought in" : 
see on,iii. 21. The verb is a favourite with Lk. (xiv. 21, xxiL 54, 
and six times in Acts) : elsewhere only Jn. xviil 16; Heb. L 6. 

rods yovis. We cannot infer from this that either here or 
ver. 41 Luke is using an authority that was ignorant of the super- 
natural birth of Jesus. It is more reasonable to suppose that the 
whole of this " Gospel of the Infancy " comes from one source, 
viz. the house of Mary, and that in these passages the narrator 
employs the usual expression. Joseph (iv. 22) and Mary were 
commonly called His parents: comp. ver. 33. It is possible 
to take irepl auTou after vo^ov or after etduTpcvov ; but more prob- 
ably it belongs to TOV ironjcrau For KCIT& T dBia-^oy see on L 8. 

2Q. Kal afiTo's. First the parents, and then fa holds the child in 
his arms ; the KaC being either " also " (he as well as they), or simply 
introducing the apodosis after fr r$ eurayayeiv.. Each side acts its 
proper part The parents bring Him in accordance with the Divine 
Law, and Symeon welcomes Him in accordance with the Divine 
impulse. Symeon is sometimes called eo8oxos. See on viii 13. 

Latin renderings of ctyjcdXas vary : ulnas (Vulg.), mantis (cef ), <un$kxum 
(a), alas (d). The last is a late use of ala* 

20-82. The Nunc Dimittts. . In its suppressed rapture and 
vivid intensity this canticle equals the most beautiful of the 
Psalms. Since the fifth century it has been used in the evening 
services of the Church (Afost. Const. viL 48 1 ), and has often been 
the hymn of dying saints. It is the sweetest and most solemn of 
all the canticles. 

Symeon represents himself as a servant or watchman released 
from duty, because that for which he was commanded to watch has 
appeared. Comp. the opening of the Agamemnon of ^Eschylus, 

1 Most of the canticles from O.T. and N.T. were said at Lauds both in East 
and West But the Magnificat was transferred in the West to Vespers, and the 
Nwnc IXmittis seems to have been always used in the evening, in the Last at 
Vespers, in the West at Compline. Kraus, ReaL-Enc. a. Cfo. AH. ii. p. 5061 
Bingbam, Orig. vi 47. 


where the sentinel rejoices at his release from the long watch for 
the fire signal respecting the capture of Troy. 

29, vuv. " Now that I have at last seen the long-looked for 
Messiah " : the vvv stands first with emphasis. 

diroXJeis T. SovXoV or., 8&nroTa. All three words show that the 
figure is that of the manumission of a slave, or of his release from 
a long task. Death is the instrument of release. *A7roA.ucu is used 
of the deaths of Abraham (Gen. xv. 2), of Aaron (Num. xx. 29), of 
Tobit (Tob. iii. 6), of a martyr (2 Mac. vii. 9) : comp. Soph. Ant. 
1268, and many examples in Wetst AecnroTTfs is the " master of a 
slave? and the Greeks sometimes refused the title to any but the 
gods in reference to themselves (Eur. HippoL 88). In Scripture it 
is not often used of God : Acts iv. 24; Rev. vi. 10; perhaps 
Jude 4, which, however, like 2 Pet ii. i, may refer to Christ 
Comp. Job v. 8; Wisd. vi. 7, viii. 3; Ecclus. xxxvi. i; 3 Mac. 
ii. 2; Philo, Quls rer. dtv. h&r. vi.; and see Trench, Syn. xxviii. 
In using the word Symeon acknowledges God's absolute right to 
dispose of him, either in retaining or dispensing with his service. 

K<XT& T& pTJfid crou. The Divine command communicated to 
him (ver. 26). Note the exact correspondence between his hymn 
and the previous promise : diroXucts = iSetv OWCLTOV, elSov = $#, TO 
crwnjpLov crou TOV Xptorov Kvpibv. Iv eip^nr}. With emphasis, 
answering to the emphatic vvv : the beginning and the end of the 
verse correspond. It is the peace of completeness, of work 
finished and hopes fulfilled. Comp. " Thou shalt go to thy fathers 
in peace" (Gen. xv. 15). 

30, on. Introduces the cause of the perfect peace. elScy ot 

u. Hebraistic fulness of expression : comp. Job xix. 27, 
5. His hands also had handled (i Jn. i. i); but he mentions 
sight rather than handling, because sight was specially promised 
^ver. 26). This verse probably suggested the worthless tradition 
chat Symeon was blind, and received his sight as the Messiah 
approached him, 

TO <ro>TYJpioi>. "The Messianic salvation," and scarcely to be 
distinguished from rrjv o-co-nyptav. Comp. iii. 6; Acts xxviii. 28; 
Ps. xcviiL 3; Is. xL 5; Clem. Rom. Cor. xxxvi. i. In LXX it is 
freq., sometimes in the sense of "safety," sometimes of "peace- 
offering." Win. xxxiv. 2, p. 294. That Symeon says so little about 
the Child, and nothing about the wonders which attended His 
birth (of which he had probably not heard), is a mark of genuine- 
ness. Fiction would have made him dwell on these things. 

31, 82. The second strophe of the canticle. Having stated 
what the appearance of the Messiah has been to himself, Symeon 
now states what the Messiah will be to the world. 

31. TJToifjtao-as. When used of God, t! le verb almost = " ordain. M 
Comp. Mt xx. 23, xxv. 34; Mk. x. 40; i Cor. ii 9; Heb. xL 16, 


where, as here, the word is used of ordaining blessings. It is used 
only once of punishment (Mt. xxv. 41). 

Kara irpo'crw-nw irtivruv T&V \a>v. This includes both Jews and 
Gentiles, as the next verse shows, and is in harmony with the 
universal character of this Gospel: comp. Is. xix. 24, 25, xlii. 6, 
xhx. 6, Ix. 3, and especially Hi. 10, airoKoXuil/ci Kvpios rbv ]3paxtW 
avrov TOV ayiov cvanriov irdvrwv T&V e&vfav, /cat o^oi/rat TTOLVTCL TO. axpa. 
TYJS yijs Ttfv <r<nrr)pLav rrjv irapa TOV eo9 ly/Mov. Both in LXX and 
N.T. /caret irpoo-wirov is common; it occurs several times in 

32. The wrypiov is analysed into light and glory, and "the 
peoples" into heathen and Jews, that "profound dualism which 
dominates the biblical history of humanity from Genesis to Revela- 
tion" (Godet). The passage is a combination of Ps. xcviii. 2, 
tvavTiov roiv e6v5>v <MrKaA.i;^e rvjv SiKaiocrvvyv avrov, with Is. xlix. 6, 
Se'oWa <rc cis <ais 0va>v, and <ois and S6ay are in apposition with 
TO cruTTjpLov, But some take both as depending on ^rot/iao-as, and 
others take Sofa? after efc co-ordinately with aaroKaXv^ftv. This last 
is Luther's : ein Licht zu erkuchten die Heiden und zum Preis deines 
Volkes\ but it is very improbable. 

diroKdXu\|fic IQvw. Either i. "revelation to belong to the Gen- 
tiles"; or 2. "instruction ^the Gentiles"; or 3. " unveiling of the 
Gentiles," i.e. for removing the gross darkness which covers them 
(Is. xxv. 7, Ix. 2); or 4. (taking IBv&v after <f>&i) "a light of the 
Gentiles unto revelation" (Is. xL 5). The first is best, "a light 
with a view to revelation which shall belong to the Gentiles," making 
c6v&v a poss. gen. Does oVo/coA-vi/ris ever mean " instruction " ? x 
And to represent the heathen as revealed by the light seems to be 
an inversion : revealed to whonrt 

Elsewhere in N.T. the gen. after dvoiaiXv^tt is either the person who reveals 
(2 Cor. xii. i; Rev. L i), or the thmg revealed (Rom. ii. 5; I Pet iv. 13); but 
the poss. gen. is quite possible. The word is eminently Pauline (Crein. Lex. 
P- 343)* It may be doubted whether the glory of Israel (Rom. ix. 4) is men- 
tioned after the enlightening of the Gentiles in order to indicate that Israel 
obtained its full glory after and through the enlightenment of the Gentiles ; for 
the heathen accepted the salvation which the Jews refused, and from the heathen 
it came back to Israel (Bede, Beng.). 

The strain of confidence and joy which pervades the canticle is strong 
evidence of the historical character of the narrative. The condition of the 
Jewish nation at the close of the first century or beginning of the second is cer- 
tainly not reflected hi it : <?e$t le pvr accent pnmtttf (Godet). And Schleier- 
macher remarks that "it is a circumstance too natural for a poetical fiction" 
that Symeon takes no notice of the parents until they show surprise, but is lest 
in an enthusiastic address to God. $ee small print on L 56. 

88-85. Symeon's Address to the Virgin. " The foreboding of 
suffering to Mary, so indefinitely expressed, bears no mark oifost 
1 Grotius admits without commending this rendering, and quotes Ps. cxix. 18, 


actum invention. But the inspired idea of Messiah in the pious 
old man obviously connected the^ sufferings which He was to 
endure in His strife against the corrupt people with those which 
were foretold of Him in Is. liii." (Neander, Leben Jesus Christt^ 
1 8, Eng. tr. p. 27). The change from the unmixed joy and glory 
of the angelic announcements and of the evangelic hymns is very 
marked Here for the first time in the narrative we have an 
intimation of future suffering. 

33. flv When the sing, verb was written, only the first of the persont 
mentioned was in the wntePs mind : such irregularities are common (Mt. xm. 
3, xxu. 40). OttviiatovTes M. Excepting Mk. xii. 17, this construction^ 
peculiar in N.T. to Lk. (iv. 22, ix. 43, xx. 26 ; Acts 111. 12). It is quite 
class, and freq. in LXX (Judith x. 7, 19, 23, xi. 20 ; Job xli. I ; Eccles. v. 7 ; 
Is. lii. 15). The objection of Strauss, that this wonder of the parents is 
inconsistent with the angelic annunciation, is pointless. Symeon's declaration 
about the Gentiles goes far beyond the Angel's promise, and it was marrellous 
that Symeon should know anything about the Child's nature and destiny. 

84. Ketrat. "Is appointed," Phil. i. 16; i Thes. iii, 3; Josh* 

iv. 6 ; not " is lying " here in thine arms. 

eis irrtocriv. In accordance with Is. viii. 14, where the same 
double destiny is expressed. The coming of the Messiah neces- 
sarily involves a crisis^ a separation, or judgment (/cpuris). Some 
welcome the Light; others "love the darkness rather than the 
Light, because their works are evil" (Jn. iii. 19), and are by their 
own conduct condemned. Judas despairs, Peter repents; one 
robber blasphemes, the other confesses (2 Cor. ii. 16). Hence the 
Trrwcns of many is an inevitable result of the manifestation of the 
Christ. Yet the purpose is not arams, but avaorrao-is and cror^pta 
(Rom. xi. n, 12). Elsewhere in N.T. d^orao-ts means the 
resurrection of the dead; in bibl. Grk. it is never transitive. 
Some understand the metaphor as that of a stone lying (/ccma), 
against which some stumble and fall (Mt xxi. 44 ; Acts iv. 1 1 ; 
Rom. ix, 33 ; i Pet. ii. 6), while others use it as a means to rise. 
But the latter half of the figure is less appropriate. 

crTjjAeioy. A manifest token, a phenomenon impossible to 
ignore, by means of which something else is known. A person 
may be a tn^ioi/, as Christ is said to be here, and Jonah in 
xi. 30. dmXeyo'juiei/oy. "Which is spoken against." This is the 
7roris, that men recognize, and yet reject and oppose, the 
cnj/xetov ; an opposition which reached a climax in the crucifixion 
(Heb. xii. 3). For the passive comp. Acts xxviii 22. 

85. From K<U o-ou to popjxxta is not a parenthesis; there is 
nothing in the construction to indicate that it is one, and a state- 
ment of such moment to the person addressed would hardly be 
introduced parenthetically. It is the inevitable result of the 
ta: the Mother's heart is pierced by the rejection and 


crucifixion of her Son. afrnjs. 1 In opposition to oSros. r?|> 
tfrux^. The seat of the affections and human emotions. pop^aia. 
(i) A long Thracian pike; (2) a large sword, greater than /i<x<"pa 
(xxii. 36, 38, 49, 52) or i<os. Such a weapon better signifies 
extreme anguish than doubt, the interpretation which Origen, Bleek, 
and Reuss prefer, as if she would be tempted to join in the 
dvTiXeyeiv. In that case we should expect TO irvoJ/Aa for r. iruxqv. 
The word is frequent in LXX and Rev. (L 16, ii. 12, 16, vl 8, 
rix. 15, ai). 

oirws Si'. This depends upon the whole statement from *l8ov 
to po/t^cuo, not on the last clause only ; on jecirac, not on StcXcv- 
crerat. It was the Divine purpose that the manifestation of the 
Messiah should cause the crisis just described ; men must decide 
either to join or to oppose Him. The &> indicates that in every 
case the appearance of the Christ produces this result : thoughts, 
hitherto secret, become known through acceptance or rejection of 
the Christ 

Acts iii. 19, 20 should be compared. There, as here, we have b 
followed by &TWJ &p. In N.T. &ra fo is rare ; elsewhere only in quotations 
from LXX (Acts xv. 17 from Amos ix. 12 ; Rom. iii. 4 from Ps. 1L 6), 

K TP. KapSuw. "Forth from many hearts," where they have 
been concealed; or "Forth from the hearts of many." For 
fciaXoYUTjioi see on v. 22. 

36-88. Anna the Prophetess. That the Evangelist obtained 
this narrative "directly or indirectly from the lips of this Anna 
who is so accurately described," is less probable than that the 
source for all this chapter is one and the same, viz. some member 
of the Holy Family, and probably Mary herself. 

36. fy. Either "was present? as in Mk. xv. 40, in which case 
ty in the sense of "was" has to be understood with what follows; 
or simply " there was," which is better. Thus all runs in logical 
order. First the existence of Anna is stated, then her life and 
character, and finally her presence on this occasion. Symeon 
comes to the temple under the influence of the Spirit; Anna 
(Hannah) dwells there continually. The sight of the Messiah 
makes him at once long for death ; it seems to give her renewed 
vigour of life. Is this subtle distinction of character the creation 
of a writer of fiction ? We find fiction at work in the tradition 
that Mary had been brought up in the temple under the tutelage 
of Anna. There is nothing here to indicate that Anna had ever 
seen Mary previously. 

1 It is not easy to decide whether the to after ffou is genuine or not Cm. 
B L 3, Vulg. Boh. Aeth. Aim. Ins. ^ A D, Syrr., Oiig. If it be admitted, 
comp, i. 76 ; and render /toi . . . 5e . . . in the same way in both passages: 
'* Yea and." For &e\?<rrw see on ver. 15. 


Neither in ver. 36 (ical fa) nor in ver. 37 (ical a^n}) does Kat = " also " in 
ref. to ver. 25. The meaning is not " There was Symeon, the holy and aged 
man ; also Anna, the holy and aged woman." Throughout the section Kat 

irpo<(>TjTis. She was known as such before this occasion. Like 
Miriam, Deborah, Huldah, and the daughters of Philip, Anna was 
a woman divinely inspired to make known God's will to others. 
That her genealogy is given because prophetesses are rare, is 
doubtful But Lk.'s accuracy appears in such details, which a 
forger would have avoided for fear of mistakes. Although the ten 
tribes were lost, some families possessed private genealogies. ^ For 
the word irpoffiris comp. Rev. ii. 20 ; Exod. xv. 20 ; Judg. iv. 4 ; 
2 Chron. xxxiv. 2 ; Is. viiL 3. 

For the omission of the art after Bvydryp see on i. 5. $cfoow$X =s ** Face 
of God," Peniel or Penuel (Gen. xxxii. 31, 32) ; in LXX etSos 6eoO. ' 
2 Chron. rxx. ix. 

j irpoj3ej3T)Kuta, K.T.\. "She was advanced in many days, 
having lived with a husband seven years from her virginity, and 
herself a widow even for eighty-four years." From avn? xpo/3/3. to 
Toxrapa>y is a parenthesis in which fy is to be understood : f^o-ao-a 
explains wpo/Se/fy/cwo, and afctf balances fiera dvSpos. She was of 
great age, because she had lived l seven years as a wife and eighty- 
four years by herself (Rom. vii. 25) as a widow. The !o>s draws 
attention to the great length of her widowhood; "up to as much 
as" (ML xviii. 21, 22). That she should be considerably over a 
hundred years old is not incredible. But the eighty-four may be 
intended to include the seven years and the time before her 
marriage. In any case the clumsy arrangement of taking all three 
verses (36-38) as one sentence, and making avn? the nom. to 
av0<afj.o\oyLTo, should be avoided. That she had never, in spite of 
her early widowhood, married again, was held to be very honourable 
to her : comp. i Tim. v. 3, 5. Monogamia apud ethnuos in summo 
honore est (Tertul. de. Exh. Cast. xiii. : comp. de Monog. xvi. ; ad 
Uxor. L 7). See quotations in Wetst. on i Tim. iii. 2, and 
Whiston's note on Jos. Ant xviii. 6. 6. 

37. OUK dcfrwrraTo roO Upou. See on viii. 13. This is to be 
understood, like xxiv. 53, of constant attendance, rather than of 
actual residence within the temple precincts, although the latter may 
have been possible. She never missed a service, and between the 
services she spent most of her time in the temple. In spite of her 
age she kept more than the customary fasts (comp. v, 33), perhaps 
more than the Mondays and Thursdays (see on xviii* 12), and spent 
an unusual amount of time in prayer. 

1 The first aorist of f?* is late Greek. It occurs Acts xxvi. 5 ; Rom* *iv. 91 
Rev. ii. 8, xx. 4. Attic writers use eptar, which is not found in N.T 


-a. Freq. in Lk., Paul, and Heb. See on iv. 3. Not in Mk. 
or Jn. Mt. iv. 10 from Deut. vi 13. YVKTO. K. fj^pav. Comp. Acts 
xxvi. 7. Th 3 is the usual order: Mk iv. 27, v. 5 ; Acts xx. 31 ; I Thes. 
ii. 9, 111. 10 ; 2 Thes. m. 8 ; I Tim. v. 5 ; 2 Tim. i. 3. But the other is 
ako common: xvin. 7 ; Acts ix. 24; Rev. ix. 8, etc.; and in O.T. is more 
rommon. It may be doubted whether the order makes any difference of 
meaning: see Ellicott on i Tim. v. 5, and comp. Horn. Od. ii. 345; IL 
*xiv. 73, v. 4</>; Plat. Theaet. 151 A. 

88. afrrfj TTJ Jpa. "That very hour" (RV.); see onx. 7, 21. 

. exaggerates with "that instant," as does Beza with eo ipso 
and also Gen. with "at the same instant" eirurracra. 
" Coming up " and " standing by," rather than " coming suddenly" 
{Gen. and Rhem.), although the word often has this meaning from 
the context Comp. XXL 34, x* 40, xx. i ; Acts iv. i, vi. 12, xxii. 13, 
xxiii. 27 ; and see on ver. 9. dyOwfioXo-yciTo. The dm does not 
refer to Symeon, meaning that "she in turn gave thanks"; but to 
the making ^ return^ which is involved in all thanksgiving: Ps, 
Ixxviii. 13* Ezra iii. n ; 3 Mac. vi. 33 ; Test XII. Patr. Judah i 

cXdXei. Not on that occasion, but afterwards, "she was 
habitually speaking." When she met Mary and Joseph she could 
not speak iracriv rois TrpoarSexofjLwois, for they were not present 
Grammatically wepi OUTOU may refer to r<3 w, but it evidently 
refers to the Chili Godet divides the people into three sections : 
the Pharisees, who expected a political deliverer; the Sadducees, 
who expected nothing; and the blessed few, who expected the 
spiritual deliverance or consolation (ver. 25) of Jerusalem. Bengel 
argues from iraarw erant igitur non fauci^ which does not follow, 
especially when we consider Lk.*s fondness for the word. 

Xvrpwcriv MepovcraXij|i. This, without fr, is certainly the true reading 
(^ B, many Versions and Fathers), "redemption ^Jerusalem." Comp. Is. 
xl. 2. Fiction would probably have given Anna also a hymn. Against the 
hypothesis that this narrative is "a poetical and symbolical representation," 
Schleiermacher asks, " "Why should the author, along with Symeon, have 
introduced Anna, who is not made even to answer any poetical purpose?" 

89. er&ecrcu'. "Brought to a close, accomplished"; especially 
of executing what has been prescribed '; xiL 50, xviiL 31, xxii. 37; 
Acts xiil 29; Rom. ii. 27; Jas. ii. 8. See Jn. xix. 28, which 
illustrates the difference between rXca> and' rcXewo). Syr-Sin. 
here inserts "Joseph and Mary* as nom. to c * accomplished." 
Why not " His father and His mother" (ver. 33) or " His parents" 
(ver. 43), if that text was framed to discredit the virgin birth? 

Najap^r. Lk. appears to know nothing of the visit of the 
MagL It would have suited his theme of the universality of the 
Gospel so well, that he would hardly have omitted it, if he had 
known it. In that case he was not familiar with our First Gospel 
From Mt ii. ii we infer that the Holy Family, after the Purifi- 
cation, returned to Bethlehem and there occupied a house 


The parents may have thought that the Son of David, 
born in Bethlehem, ought to be brought up there. Thence they 
fly to Egypt, a flight not mentioned in the authority used by Lk. 

40. The conclusion of a separate narrative: comp. i. 80. 
Contrast the reticence of this verse (which is all that we know 
respecting the next eleven years) with the unworthy inventions of 
the apocryphal gospels. 

wtwev K. eKparaiouTo. Of bodily development in size and 
strength; for irvoJ/wm is an insertion from i. 80. irXir]poijjxei>oi>. 
Pres. part " Being filled" day by day. The <ro<|>ia is to be regarded 
as wisdom in the highest and fullest sense. The intellectual, moral, 
and spiritual growth of the Child, like the physical, was real His 
was a perfect humanity developing perfectly, unimpeded by 
hereditary or acquired defects. It was the first instance of such a 
growth in history. For the first time a human infant was realizing 
the ideal of humanity. 

eou fy cir" OUTO. See on iv. 22 and comp. Acts iv. 33. 

It was near the beginning of this interval that the Jews sent an embassy of 
fifty to follow Archelaus to Rome, to protest against his accession, and to 
petition that Judaea might be annexed to Syria (Jos. B. J* ii. 6. I ; Ant. xvn* 
n. i), of which feet we perhaps have a trace in the parable of the Pounds 
(xix. 14). And it was near the end of this interval that another embassy went 
to complain of Archelaus to Augustus : and he was then deposed, and banished 
to Vienne in Gaul (Ant. xni. 13. 2 ; JB.J.iL 7. 3). Lewin, Fasti Sacri, 877, 
944, 1 01 1, 1026* 

41-52. The Boyhood of the Messiah. 

His Visit to Jerusalem and the Temple, and His first recorded 
Words. Here again, as in the Circumcision, the Purification, and 
the Presentation, the idea of fidelity to the Law is very con- 
spicuous. Hort, Judaistic Christianity ^ Lect. iL, Macmillan, 1894. 

41. icar" CTOS. The expression occurs here only in N.T. 
Combined with the imperf. it expresses the habitual annual practice 
of Joseph and Mary. At the Passover, Pentecost, and Tabernacles 
every male had to go up to Jerusalem (Ex. xxiiu 14-17, xxxiv. 23 ; 
Deut xvi. 1 6). But since the Dispersion this law could rot be 
kept \ yet most Palestinian Jews tried to go at least once a year. 
About women the Law says nothing, but Hillel prescribed that 
they also should go up to the Passover, Mary, like Hannah 
(i Sam. i. 7), probably went out of natural piety, and not in 
obedience to Killers rule. 

Tfi foprfi. "For the feast," or, more probably, "at the feast": dat. of 
time, as in vui. 29, xii. 20, xiii. 14, 15, ^16 ; Acts vu. 8, xiL 21, xxL 2-6, 
atxii. 13, xxvii. 23. In class. Grk. TQ fopry without iv is rare : Win. *m\- 5, 
p. 269. The phrase ^ &pr^ roO vd<rx& occurs again In. xiii, I only ; not In 


LXX. The fact that yov& has not been changed here, even in those MSS. 
in which w. 27 and 43 ha\ r e been corrupted, is some evidence that the 
corruption was not made for dogmatic reasons. The love of amplification or 
of definiteness might suffice. 

42. cr&y ScSScica. At the age of twelve a young Jew became 
" a son of the Law," and began to keep its enactments respecting 
feasts, fasts, and the like. The mention of the age implies that 
since the Presentation Jesus had not been up to Jerusalem. 
dva|3(ui'oVrwp. Imperf. part " On their usual going up." Kara rd 
605. See small print on i. 9. 

48. Kal TX6i(niTwi>. Note the change of tense. "And after 
they had fulfilled." There is nothing ungrammatical in the com- 
bination of an aor. with an imperf. part But the reading dvafiavrw 
is an obvious correction to avoid apparent awkwardness. rets 
tjjj^pas. The prescribed seven days (Ex. xii. 15, 16; Lev. xxiiL 
6-8 ; Deut xvi. 3), or the customary two days, for many pilgrims 
left after the principal sacrifices were over. 

falnewev. Contains an idea of persistence and perseverance^ 
and hence is used of remaining after others have gone : comp. Acts 
xvii. 14. The attraction of Divine things held Him fast in spite of 
the departure of His parents. It would be His first experience of 
the temple services, and especially of the slaying of the Paschal 
lamb. 6 iraTs. "The Boy," to distinguish from TO muSto? : see on 
ver. 52. OUK eyKoxraK. This shows what confidence they had in 
Him, and how little they were accustomed to watch Him. That 
it shows neglect on their part is a groundless assertion. They 
were accustomed to His obedience and prudence, and He had 
never caused them anxiety. See Hase, Geschichte Jesu, 28, 
p. 276, ed. 1891. 

44. rfj o-u^oSia. "The caravan." The inhabitants of a village, 
or of several neighbouring villages, formed themselves into a 
caravan, and travelled together. The Nazareth caravan was so 
long that it took a whole day to look through it The caravans 
went up singing psalms, especially the "songs of degrees" (Ps. 
cxx.-cxxxiv.) : but they would come back with less solemnity. It 
was probably when the caravan halted for the night that He was 
missed. At the present day the women commonly start first, and 
the men follow; the little children being with the mothers, and the 
older with either. If this was the case then, Mary might fancy that 
He was with Joseph, and Joseph that He was with Mary. Tristram, 
Eastern Customs in Bibk Lands ^ p. 56. 

In LXX &Sbv rjjdpas (Num. xL 31 ; I Kings xix. 4). Comp. 
wopelav jjfjLtpas fuat (Jon. iii. 4). 

The compound Ave^row expresses thoroughness (Acts zi. 25 ; Job iii. 4, 
x. 6 ; 2 Mac. xiii. 21). 

Gvyyevevffiv. A barbarous form of dat plur. found also Mk. vi. 4 and 
I Mac. x. 89. For yvtwQu see on xxiii. 49. 


45. p)) eupoircs. "Because they did not find" see on iii. 9, 
6ir<TTp\|(ai' dya^ToGires. The turning back was a single act, the 
seeking continued a long time. Comp. ML viii, 11, x. 2. In such 
cases the pres. part, is not virtually fat, as if it meant " in order to 
seek." The seeking was present directly the turning back took 
place. Win. xlv. i. b, p. 429. For Mtrrpetyw see small print on 
i 56, and for cylraro see detached note after ch. i. 

46. rjjUpas Tpets. These are reckoned in three ways, (i) One 
day out, at the end of which the Child is missed ; one day back ; 
and on the third the finding. This is probably correct (2) One 
day's search on the journey back ; one day's search in Jerusalem ; 
and on the third the finding. (3) Two days' search in Jerusalem, 
and then the finding. This is improbable. Jerusalem was not a 
large place, and less than a day would probably suffice. We may 
understand that on all three days Jesus was in the temple with the 
doctors. Godet conjectures that He there had an experience 
similar to that of Jacob at Bethel (Gen. xxviil 10-22): "God 
became more intimately His God, His Father." There is no 

lv TO> Upw, Not in a synagogue, if there was one in the temple 
enclosure, but probably on the terrace, where members of the 
Sanhedrin gave public instruction on sabbaths and festivals. If 
this is correct, His parents had left on the third day, and the 
Passover was still going on. If all had been over, this public 
teaching would have ceased. 

Ka0e5<5fjt6vov. As a learner, not as a teacher. St Paul sat " at 
the feet of Gamaliel" (Acts xxii. 3). Jesus probably sat on the 
ground, while the Rabbis sat on benches or stood. e> jm&rw. See 
on viii. 7. Not dignitatis causa (Beng.) or as doctor doctorum 
(Calov.), but because there were teachers on each side, possibly in 
a semicircle. The point is that He was not hidden, but where He 
could easily be found. For a list of distinguished persons who 
may have been present, see Farrar, Z. of Christ^ i. ch. vi., from 
Sepp, Leben fesu^ i. 17. Of biblical personages, Symeon, 
Gamaliel, Annas, Caiaphas, Nicodemus, and Joseph of Anmathea 
are possibilities. 

dKcujoira afrra>> ical circpajToWa afirous. Note that the hearing is 
placed first, indicating that He was there as a learner ; and it was 
as such that He questioned them. It was the usual mode of 
instruction that the pupil should ask as well as answer questions. 
A holy thirst for knowledge, especially of sacred things, would 
prompt His inquiries. The Arabic Gospel of the Infancy represents 
Him as instructing them in the statutes of the Law and the 
mysteries of the Prophets, as well as in astronomy, medicine, 
physics, and metaphysics (L-lii.). See on iii. 10. 

47. llwraiTo. A strong word expressing great amazement j 


viii. 56; Acts ii. 7, 12, viii. 13, ix. 21. For hi comp. tVisd. v, a 
and the ri which Lk. commonly uses after 6avp,dew (see on ver. 
33) ; and for irrfircs ot dKouoires see on i. 66. oWcrci. M Intelli- 
gence" ; an application of the cro^ta with which He was ever being 
filled (ver. 40) : see Lft on Col. L 9. diroKpto-ccriK His replies 
would show His wonderful intellectual and spiritual development 
The vanity of Josephus (Vita, 2) and of Bellarmine (Vita, pp. 
28-30, ed. Dollmger und Reusch, Bonn, 1887) leads them to 
record similar amazement respecting themselves. 

48. l8oTs. Return to the original subject, ot yowls. e|e- 
-tf\dyr\ara,if. Another strong expression: ix. 43; Acts xiil 12. 
They were astonished at finding Him there, and thus occupied, 
apparently without thought of them. 

tj ju^-njp aurou. It was most natural that she should be the first 
to speak. Her reproachful question perhaps contains in it a vein 
of self-reproach. She and Joseph had appeared to be negligent 

jTjToGjKei'. "Are seeking" : the pain of the anxiety has not yet 
quite ceased. For icdY<5 see on xvL 9. 

K B read frjrovfter, which WH. adopt Almost all other editors follow 
almost all other authorities in reading 

" In great anguish " of mind, as in Acts xx. 38 and 
Zech. xii. 10; of body and mind, xvi. 24, 25; comp. Rom. ix. 2; 
i Tim. vi. 10. The po/^cua (ver. 35) has already begun its work. 
Anguish cannot be reasonable. But they might have been sure 
that the Child who was to be the Messiah could not be lost This 
agrees with ver. 50. 

49. rt on et]TiT ft; Not z. reproof, but an expression of 
surprise : comp. Mk. ii. 16. He is not surprised at their coining 
back for Him, but at their not knowing where to find Him. 

Here also K has the pres. 

iv rots TOU Trarpos jiou. " Engaged in My Father's business n is 
a possible translation: comp. ra TOV cov (Mt xvL 23; Mk. viiL 
33) ; TO. TOV Kyplov (i Cor. vii. 32, 34). But " in My Father's house * 
is probably right, as in Gen. xlL 51. Irenseus (JI#r. v. 36. 2) para- 
phrases the Iv TQ owctct of Jn. xiv. 2 by ev TOIS : comp. & TO!S 'AfMtK 
(Esth. vii. 9); ev rots avrov (Job xviii. 19); ra Av/coJi/o? (Theoc. ii 
76). Other illustrations in Wetst The Armenian Version has 
in domo patris mei. The words indicate His surprise that His 
parents did not know where to find Him. His Father's business 
could have been done elsewhere. There is a gentle but decisive 
correction of His Mother's words, " Thy fattier and I," in the reply, 
"Where should a child be (Set), but in his father's house? and My 
Father is God." For the Sci see on iv. 43. It is notable that the 
first recorded words of the Messiah are an expression of His Divine 


Sonship as man ; and His question implies that they knew if, or 
ought to know it But there is nothing which implies that He had 
just received a revelation of this relationship. These first recorded 
words are the kernel of the whole narrative, and the cause of its 
having been preserved They must mean more than that Jesus is 
a son of Abraham, and therefore has God as His Father. His 
parents would easily have understood so simple a statement as 

50. oti ffuwJKew T& pfjfwu Ergo non tx illis hoc didicerat (Beng.). 
There is nothing inconsistent in this. They learnt only gradually 
what His Messiahship involved, and this is one stage in the process. 
From the point of view of her subsequent knowledge, Mary recog- 
nized that at this stage she and Joseph had not understood. This 
verse, especially when combined with the next, shows clearly who 
was the source of LL's information. 1 

51. fy fooTaorcro'|i,ei'os. This sums up the condition of the 
Messiah during the next seventeen years. The analytical tense 
gives prominence to the continuance of the subjection : comp. L 
1 8, 20, 21. For wrorao-crav comp. x. 17, 20. 

afirols. The last mention of Joseph. He was almost certainly 
dead before Christ's public ministry began ; but this statement of 
continued subjection to him and Mary probably covers some years. 
The main object of the statement, however, may be to remove the 
impression that in His reply (ver. 49) Jesus resents, or henceforward 
repudiates, their authority over Him. 

SicTi^pei. Expresses careful and continual keeping. Gen. 
xxxvii. ii is a close parallel: comp. Acts xv. 29. We must not 
confine irdn-a T& p^ara to vu. 48, 49 ; the phrase is probably used 
in the Hebraistic sense of " things spoken of." Comp. L 65, ii. 19; 
Acts v. 32 : but in all these cases " sayings " is more possible than 
here. Still more so in Dan. vii. 28 : TO p^ 

62. The verse is very similar to i Sam. ii. 26, of which it is 
perhaps a quotation. See Athan. Con. Arian. iii. 51, p. 203, ed. 
Bright; Card. Newman, Select Treatises of S. Athan. L p. 419; 
Wace & Schaff, p. 421 ; Pearson, On the Creed> art. iii. p. 160. 

The growth is very clearly marked throughout: T 
(ver. 16); TO iratScov (ver. 40); 'fyo-ovs 6 ?rats (ver. 43); 
(ver. 52). Non statim plena statura^ ut Protoplasti^ appa- 
ruit : sed omnes xtatis gradus sanctificavtt. Senectus eutn non decebat 
(Beng.). Schaff, The Person of Christ, pp. 10-17, Nisbet, 1880. 

1 " This fine tender picture, in which neither truth to nature, nor the beauty 
which that implies, is violated in a single line, . . . cannot have been devised 
by human hands, which, when left to themselves, were always betrayed into 
coarseness and exaggeration, as shown by the apocryphal gospels'* (Keim,7. 
) Eng tr. ii. p. 137). 


Here only in the Gospels, and elsewhere in N.T. 
only in S. Paul (Rom. xiii. 12; Gal. i. 14; 2 Tim. ii. 16, iii. 9, 13). 
The metaphor probably comes from pioneers cutting in front", but 
some refer it to lengthening by hammering. Hence the meaning of 
" promote " : but more often it is intransitive, as always in N.T. 
Actual growth is expressed by the word, and to explain it of 
progressive manifestation is inadequate. Hooker, EccL PoL bk. v. 

53- r -3- 

<ro<j>ia. Not " knowledge " but " wisdom," which includes know- 
ledge : it is used of the wisdom of the Egyptians (Acts vii 22). 
Jesus was capable of growth in learning; e.g. He increased in 
learning through experience in suffering: I/ia^cv &<* aiv eiraQw 
(Heb. v. 8, where see Westcoffs notes). 

TjXiiaa. Not "age," which is probably the meaning xii. 25 and 
Mt vL 27, but would be rather an empty truism here. Rather, 
" stature," as in xix. 3 : justam froceritatem nactus est ac decoram 
(Beng.). His intellectual and moral growth (<ro<ia), as well as His 
physical growth (^Xuoa), was perfect The irpotKoirre jjXiKtq. corre- 
sponds to efteyoXwcro (in some copies ro/>euero ftyoXwo/4vov) in 
i Sam. ii. 26. 

X<piTi. "Goodwill, favour, loving-kindness" (ver. 40, L 30; 
Acts iv. 33, viL 10): see on iv. 22. That He advanced in favour 
with God plainly indicates that there was moral and spiritual 
growth. At each stage He was perfect for that stage, but the 
perfection of a child is inferior to the perfection of a man ; it is 
the difference between perfect innocence and perfect holiness. He 
was perfectly (reXcas) man, as set forth in the Council of Constan- 
tinople (A.D. 381) against Apollinaris, who held that in Jesus the 
Divine Logos was a substitute for a human soul In that case an 
increase in <ro<i and in x**/ 315 vapa @e<3 would have been incon- 
ceivable, as Pearson points out (On the Cteed^ art iii. p. 160; comp. 
R Harold Browne, Exp. of the XXXIX. Articles, iv. 2. 4), 

Kai &i/0pcforois. Nothing of the kind is said of John (L 66, 80)* 
his sternness and his retirement into the desert prevented it But 
an absolutely perfect human being living among men could not 
fail to be attractive until His public ministry brought Him into 
collision with their prejudices and sins. 1 Comp. what Josephus 
says of the development of Moses (Ant. ii. 9. 6); also the promise 
made in Prov. iii. 4 to him who keeps mercy and truth : "so shalt 

1 Pearson in a long note gives the chief items of evidence as to the primitive 
belief that Is. liii. 2, 3 was to be understood literally of the personal appearance 
of Jesus as "a personage no way amiable; an aspect, indeed, rather uncomely.** 
, . . " But what the aspect of His outward appearance was, because the Scrip- 
tures are silent, we cannot now know'* (On tne Creed> art. ii. pp. 87, 88). 

Lange has some good remarks on the " master-stroke of Divine wisdom " 
which caused Jesus to be brought up at Nazareth (L. tf Christ > Eng< tr. i pp 
JI7 3*4)- 

thou find favour and good understanding in the sight of God and 

man " ev&iriov JLvpiov /ecu avOpwTTtov. 

For answers to the objections urged by Strauss against the 
historical character of this narrative see Hase, Gesch. Jesu 9 28, 
p. 280, ed. 1891* 


IIL 1-22. The External Preparation for the Ministry of the 
Christ; the Ministry of John the Baptist^ Mt iii. 1-12; Mk. 
L 1-8; Jn.L 15-24. 

Hk quasi scena N.T. panditur is BengePs illuminative remark, 
" It was the glory of John the Baptist to have revived the function 
of the prophet " (Ecce Homo, p. 2) ; and it is difficult for us to 
realize what that meant A nation, which from Samuel to Malachi 
had scarcely ever been without a living oracle of God, had for 
three or four centuries never heard the voice of a Prophet It 
seemed as if Jehovah had withdrawn from His people. The 
breaking of this oppressive silence by the voice of the Baptist 
caused a thrill through the whole Jewish population throughout 
the world. Lk. shows his appreciation of the magnitude of the 
crisis by the sixfold attempt to give it an exact date. Of the fotu 
Evangelists he is the only one to whom the title of historian in the 
full sense of the term can be given ; and of Christian writers he is 
the first who tries to fit the Gospel history into the history of the 
world. It is with a similar wish to do justice to a crisis that 
Thucydides gives a sixfold date of the entry of the Thebans into 
Platsea, by which the thirty years' truce was manifestly broken and 
the Peloponnesian War begun (ii. 2 ; comp. v. 20). 

The section is carefully arranged. First the Date (i, 2) ; then 
a Description of the new Prophet (3-6) ; then an account of his 
Preaching and its Effects (7-17) ; and an Explanation as to how it 
came to an End (18-20). He baptizes the Christ (21, 22). 

1, 2. The Date. The event that is thus elaborately dated is 
the appearance of the new Prophet, not the beginning of Christ's 
ministry. See below on the conclusion of ver. 2. EUicott con- 
siders it the date of the captivity of the Baptist This had been 
advocated by Wieseler in his Synopsis (ii. ch. ii. Eng. tr. p. 
178), but he abandoned it in his Beitrage. Others would make 
it refer to Christ's baptism, which may have followed closely 


upon John's first appearance as a preacher (Caspar!, Chron. Eint 
33> Eng. tr. p. 41). But the interval between the beginning of 
John's ministry and his baptizing Jesus cannot be determined. 
Some estimate it at one month, others at six months, because John 
was six months older than Jesus (Lewin, Fasti Sacri, 1171). Weiss 
(Lebenjesu, I. ii. 8, Eng. tr. L p. 316) shows that the interval was 
not more than six months. The appearance of one who seemed 
to be a Prophet soon attracted immense attention; and when 
large numbers accepted his doctrine and baptism, it became 
imperative that the hierarchy should make inquiry as to his 
authority and claims. But it appears from Jn. i. 19-28 that the 
first investigation made by the Sanhedrin was about the time when 
the Baptist met Jesus. In neither case can year or time of year 
be determined. If Jesus was born towards the end, John about 
the middle, of 749 (B.C. 5), then John might begin to preach about 
the middle of 779, and Jesus be baptized early in 780 (A.D. 27). 

It is little or no confirmation of this result that both the Greek and the 
Roman Churches celebrate the Baptism of Christ on Jan. 6th. Originally, the 
Nativity, the Visit of the Magi, ana the Baptism were all celebrated on Jan. 6th. 
"When Dec. 2th was adopted as the date of the Nativity, the Roman Church 
continued to celebrate the Baptism with the Epiphany to the Gentiles on Jan. 
6th, while the Greek Church transferred the latter along with the Nativity to 
Dec. 25th, commemorating the Baptism alone on Jan. 6th. The fact that both 
uie Eastern and the Western Church have concurred in celebrating the Baptism 
on Jan. 6th seems at first sight to be imposing testimony. But there is little 
doubt that all trustworthy evidence had perished before any of these dates were 
selected. 1 

Instead of the elaborate dates given in these ^first two verses, Mt (iii. i) has 
simply 'By te rcuj fyi^xuj e/ccfrcus, while Mk. (i. 4) has nothing. Comp. the 
somewhat similar dating of the erection of Solomon's temple (i Kings vL i). 
Beng. says of this date, Epocka tccksim omnium maxima, itic quasi scena N. T. 
panditur. Ne natvvitat^ quidtm> out mortis y resurrectionis^ ascensumis christi 
tcmpus lampr&asc definitur. 

1. *EK erei 81 iren-KcuoK(lTw rfjs TJyejJtoHias Tipepiou Kaurapo?. 
He naturally begins with the Roman Empire, and then takes the 
local governors, civil and ecdesiasticaL "Now in the isth year 
of the reign of Tiberius Caesar," or " of Tiberius as Caesar." Is the 
1 5th year to be counted from the death of Augustus, Aug. 19th, 
A.U.C. 767, A.D. 14? or from the time when he was associated 
with Augustus as joint ruler at the end of 764 or beginning of 
765, A.D. ii or 12? It is impossible to determine this with 
certainty. Good authorities (Zumpt, Wieseler, Weiss) plead for 
the latter reckoning, which makes the Gospel chronology as a 
whole run more smoothly; but it is intrinsically less probable, 

1 For the chief data respecting the limits of our Lord's life see LA. 
Biblical Essays, p. 58, note ; and on Lk.*s chronology in these verses sea 
Ewald, Hist, of Israel, vL, Eng. tr. p. 149, and Lange, L. of C. bk* ii. pt iii. 
| I, i p. 342. 



And stems to be inconsistent with the statements of Tacitus and 

The main points me these. I. Tiberius was not joint Emperor with 
Augustus ; he was associated with him only in respect of the provinces and 
armies: ut provincias cum Augusta communiter admimstraret, simulque 
cmsum ageret (Suet. Tib. xxi J ; ut xquum ei jus in omnibus provinciis 
txercitibusque esset (Veil. Paterc. iL 121); filius, collega imperil, consort 
tribunidto protestatis adsumitur^ omnisqueper exercitus ostentatur (Tac. Ann. 
i* 3 3 > comp. L II. 2 and 111. 56* 2). 2. It is clear from Tacitus (Ann. i. 5-7) 
that, when Augustus died, Tiberius was not regarded by himself or by others as 
already Emperor* Suetonius confirms this by saying that Tiberius, while 
manifestly getting the imperial power into his hands, for a time refused the 
offer of it (Tib. xxiv.). 3. No instance is known of reckoning the reign of 
Tiberius from his association with Augustus. The coins of Antioch, Lk 's own 
city, which helped to convert Wieseler from the one view to the other by 
seeming to date the reign of Tiberius from the association, are not admitted by 
Eckhel to be genuine. On the other hand, there are corns of Antioch which 
date the reign of Tiberius from the death of Augustus. It remains, therefore, 
that, although to reckon from the association was a possible method, especially 
in the provinces, for there Tiberius had been really a consort of Augustus, yet 
it is more probable that Lk. reckons in the usual way from the death of the 
predecessor (see Wieseler, Chron. Synop. iu ch. li. ; Keim, Jesus of Nat. 11. 
pp. 381, 382; Lewin, Fasti Sacn, 1044; Sanday, Fourth Gosfel, p. 65). 
Fifteen years from the death of Augustus would be A.D. 29, at which time our 
Lord would probably be 32 years of age, which sufficiently agrees with Lk.'s 
" about 30 " (ver. 23). If the earlier date is admissible, the agreement becomes 

Quite a vague term, and applicable to the rule of 
emperor, king, kgatu$> or procurator^ as is shown by Jos. Ant. 
xviiL 4. 2, and by the use of yye/^w in N.T. : xx. 20, xxi. 12 j 
Acts xxiiL 24, 26, 33, etc. Wieseler is alone in seeing in this 
word (instead of fioj/a/)^ta), and in Ktuoup (instead of Sej&xoros), 
evidence that the co-regency of Tiberius is meant (Beitrage z. 
ricktigen Wurdigung d. Evan. 1869, pp. 191-194). From the 
Emperor Lk. passes to the local governor under him. 

^yejxoyeuorros. The more exact tmrpoircvovTos of D and other 
authorities is an obvious correction to mark his office with pre- 
cision: im-po7ros= procurator. Pilate succeeded Valerius Gratus 
A.D. 25, and was recalled A.D. 36 or 37 by Tiberius, who died, 
March A.D. 37, before Pilate reached Rome. Having mentioned 
the Roman officials, Lk. next gives the local national rulers. 

TCTpapxoGn-os. The word occurs nowhere else in N.T., but is 
used by Josephus of Philip, tetrarch of Trachonitis (B*J. iii. 10. 7). 
The title tetrarch was at first used literally of the governor of a 
fourth ; eg. of one of the four provinces of Thessaly (Eur. Ale. 
1154), or one of the fourths into which each of the three divisions 
of Gaktia were divided (Strabo, 430, 540, 560, 567). But after- 
wards it came to mean the governor of any division, as a third or 
t hal or of any small country ; any ruler not a /?acnXevs (Hoi. 


Sat. L 3. 12). Such seems to be the meaning here; but it may 
be used in its literal sense, Pilate's province representing the 
fourth tetrarchy, viz. the dominions of Archelaus. 

In d we have the singular rendering : in anno qmntodecimo ducatus Tiberi 
Casaris procurantc Pontto Pilato Jud&&, <ptaterditcatus Gahs&& ff erode* 

Antipas, son of Herod the Great and Malthace the 
Samaritan. See small print on L 5 for the iota subscript. Two 
inscriptions have been found, one at Cos and one at Delos, which 
almost certainly refer to him as tetrarch, and son of Herod the 
king (Schurer, Jewish People in the T. of J. C. L vol. 11. p. 17). 
His coins have the title tetrarch, and, like those of his father, bear 
no image. Herod Philip was the first to have any portrait on the 
coins of a Jewish prince. He had the images of Augustus and 
Tiberius put upon his coins. As his dominions were wholly 
heathen, this would cause little scandal He even went so far as 
to put the temple of Augustus at Panias on his coins. Herod 
Antipas was made tetrarch of Persea and Galilee, B.C. 4 (Jos, Ant. 
xvii. ir. 4; JB.J. iL 6. 3). As he ruled this district until A.D. 39 
or 40, the whole of Christ's life falls within his reign, and nearly 
the whole of Christ* s ministry took place within his dominions. 
For his character see on xiii. 32. He was by courtesy allowed 
the title of /SflwnAevs (ML vl 14) ; and as Agrippa had obtained 
this by right, Antipas and Herodias went to Rome, A.D. 39, to try 
and get the courtesy title made a real one by Caligula, The 
attempt led to his banishment, the details of which are uncertain, 
for Josephus makes inconsistent statements. Either he was 
banished at Baiae, A.D. 39, to Lugdunum (Ant. xviii. 7. 2), or he 
had a second audience with Caligula at Lugdunum, A.D. 40, and 
was banished to Spain (B. f.u.g. 6). The latter is probably 
correct (Lewin, Fasti Sam, 1561). 

*i\tinrou. Herod Philip, son of Herod the Great and Cleo- 
patra. He reigned for nearly 37 years, B.C. 4 to A.D. 33, when he 
died at Julias, which he had built and named in honour of the 
infamous Julia, d. of Augustus and wife of Tiberius. He was the 
builder of Caesarea Philippi (B. J. ii. 9. i), and was the best of the 
Herods (Ant. xviii. 4. 6). He married his niece Salome soon 
after she had danced for the head of the Baptist, A.D. 31 (Ant. 
xviii. 5. 4). Trachonitis (rpa^d)v = T/)a^u? ical a-erpwSiys rosros) 
derived its name from the rugged character of the country. It lay 
N.E. of Galilee in the direction of Damascus, and its inhabitants 
were skilled archers and very often banditti (Ant. xv. 10. i). The 
expression TJ)S 'Ir. ical Tp. x^P as > "& e region of Ifuraea and 
Trachonitis," seems to indicate that more than these two is 
included; probably Auranitis and Batansea. Irupata, both here 
and perhaps everywhere, is an adjective. 


rcrp. Not merely Strauss, Gfrorer, B, 
Bauer, and Hilgenfeld, but even Keim and Holtzmann, attribute 
to Lk, the gross chronological blunder of supposing that Lysanias, 
son of Ptolemy, who ruled this region previous to B.C. 36, when he 
was killed by M. Antony, is still reigning 60 years after his death. 
Such a mistake is very improbable ; and the only difficulty about 
Lk/s statement is that we have no indisputable evidence of this 
tetrarch Lysanias. 

But I. Lysanias, son of Ptolemy, was styled kingvub not tetrarch, and the 
seat of his kingdom was Chalets m Ceele-Syria, not Abila in Abilene. 2. It is 
pure assumption that no one of his name ever ruled in these parts afterwards. 

3. Josephus (Ant. xix. 5. i) speaks of "Abila of Lysanias," and (xx. 7. i) of a 
tetrarchy of Lysanias (comp. B.J. 11. 1 1. 5, 12. 8) ; and as the son of Ptolemy 
was not called tetrarch, nor was connected with Abila, and, moreover, reigned 
for only 5 or 6 years, it is improbable that " Abila of Lysanias " was called 
after him. Therefore these passages in Josephus confirm rather than oppose Lk. 

4. A medal found by Pococke designates Lysanias "tetrarch and high priest." 
If this refers to either, it is more likely to refer to Lk.'s Lysanias. 5. Two 
inscriptions exist, one of which proves that Lysanias, the son of Ptolemy, 
left children ; the other, that at the time when Tibet ms was associated with 
Augustus theie was a "tetrarch Lysanias" (Boeckh, Corp znscr. Gr. 4.523, 
4521). See Davidson, Intr. to N.T. i. pp. 214-221, 1st ed. ; Rawlmson, 
Bampton Lectures for 1859, p. 203; Wieseler in Herzog, 3 i. pp. 87-89; and 
the reff. in Thayer*s Grimm under Awrcw/ay. 

2. cm dpxtpeo>s *Awa ical Kcud<f>a. Lk. now passes to the 
ecclesiastical rulers. The singular is probably not accidental, and 
certainly not ironical. " Under the high priest Annas-Caiaphas," 
which means that between them they discharged the duties, or that 
each of them in different senses was regarded high priest, Annas 
dejure (Acts iv. 6) and Caiaphas de facto (Jn. xL 49). 

Annas had held office A.D. 7-14, when he had been deposed by Valerius 
Gratus, the predecessor of Pilate, who set up in succession Ismael, Eleazar 
(son of Annas), Simon, and Joseph sumamed Caiaphas, who held office A.D. 
18-36, when he was deposed by Vitelhus. Four more sons of Annas succeeded 
Caiaphas, the last of whom (another Annas) put to death James the "brother 
of the Lord' and the first bishop of Jerusalem. It is manifest that Annas 
retained very great influence, and sometimes acted as high pnest "Annas 
*he high pnest was there, and Caiaphas, and John, and Alexander, and as 
many as were of the kindred of the high pnest " (Acts iv. 6). Perhaps, so far 
as it was safe to do so, he was encouraged to ignore the Roman appointments and 
to continue in office dunng the high pnesthoods of his successors. This would 
be especially easy when his own son-in-law or son happened to be the Roman 
nominee. 1 There were no less than twenty-eight high pnests from the time of 
Herod the Great to the capture of Jerusalem by Titus (Jos. Ant. xx. 10). 

0cou cm 'ludvyv. It is clear from this that what 
Lk. is anxious to date with precision is not any event in the life 
of the Messiah, but the appearance of the new Prophet^ who was 

1 Josephus sajs that David appointed Zadok high priest /*er* ' 
^tXoj yap ty awry (Ant* vii 5. 4). See Lft. Biblical Essays^ p. 163. 


to be the Messiah's herald, and who was by some mistaken for 
the Messiah. John's preaching and baptizing is an epoch with 
Lk. (Acts L 22, x. 37, xiii. 24). As distinct from 6 Xoyos TOV 
Oeov, which means the Gospel message as a whole (see on 
viii. n), pypa ov means some particular utterance (Mt iv. 4; 
comp. Lk. xxii. 61). The phrase yiveo-tfat prj/j,a Kvpiov (not eov) 
is freq. in LXX (Gen. xv. i ; i Sam. xv. 10 ; 2 Sam. vii. 4 ; i Kings 
xvu. 2, 8, xvui. i, xx. 28, etc.) ; also ytW0<u Aoyov Kvpiov (2 Sam. 
xxiv. ii ; i Kings vi. n, xii. 22, xiii. 20, xvi. i, etc.). It is the 
O.T. formula to express Divine inspiration. In all cases the 
phrase is almost always followed by irpos: but in i Chron. xxii 8 (?) 
and Jer. i. i we have 1-xL Jer. i. i is a close parallel to this : TO 
prjfjLa TOV ov o eyVTo em Itpcfitoy. The phrase occurs nowhere 

*\udw\v rdy Za^apiou utoV. Lk. alone describes the Baptist thus. 
No other N.T. writer mentions Zachanas. iv rfj ep^jjuj). The one 
mentioned as his abode (i. 80). Both AV. and RV. rather obscure 
this by using "deserts" in L 80 and "wilderness" here. Mt calls 
it " the wilderness of Judsea " (lii. i). It is the Jeshimon of i Sam. 
xxiii. 19. See Z>.^. 2 art " Arabah," and Stanley, Sin. &PaL p. 310. 

3-6. Description of the New Prophet Lk. omits the state- 
ments about his dress and food (Mt. iii. 4 ; Mk. i. 6), and also the 
going out of the people of Jerusalem and Judaea to him (Mt. iii. 5 ; 
Mk. i. 5). The famous account of the Baptist in Jos. Ant. xviii. 
5. 2 should be compared. It may have been altered by Christian 
scribes, but its divergence from the Gospel narrative as to the 
motive for imprisoning and killing John, is in favour of its origin- 
ality. 1 

3. irao-ay -rrepixupoi' TOU 'lopBrfyou. The same as "the//0/ of 
Jordan," which is thus rendered in LXX Gen. xiii. 10, n \ by TW 
TTpLx<f>p<$ TOV 'I., 2 Chron. iv, 17 ; and by T ircpiouco) TOV 'I., i 
Kings vii. 46. The expression covers a considerable portion of the 
Jordan valley at least as far north as Succoth (2 Chron. iv. 17). 
The Baptist, therefore, moved north from the limestone desert on 
the W. shore of the Dead Sea, and perhaps went almost the whole 
length of the valley to the confines of the Sea of Galilee. For 
"Bethany (Beth-Anijah = * House of Shipping') beyond Jordan" 
must have been near Galilee (Jn. i. 28), and is supposed by 
Conder to be the same as Bashan (Handbook of the BibU^ pp. 315* 
320). See, however, D.B? art. "Bethabara." John was some- 
times on one bank and sometimes on the other, for we read of his 
working in Peraea (Jn. x. 40). His selection of the valley of the 

1 " This part of John's ministry, viz. his work as a reformer, Josephus has 
brought out prominently ; while he has entirely foiled to notice the indelible 
itamp of the Baptist's labours left upon the history of the Theocracy " (Neander, 


Jordan as his sphere of work was partly determined by the need of 
water for immersion. Stanley, Sin. <5r* Pal. p. 312. 

jo]put7oxoi> . . . d/xapnwy. Verbatim as Mk. L 4. Nowhere in 
N.T. has /ci7pv<roriv its primary meaning of "act as a herald"; but 
either "proclaim openly" (viii. 39, xii. 3; Mk. L 45, etc.) or 
"preach the Gospel" (Mt xi. ij Mk. iii. 14; Rom. x. 14, 15* 
etc.). To "preach baptism " is to preach the necessity or value of 
baptism ; and " repentance baptism " (/3a7m(rju,a //.cravcuas) is bap- 
tism connected with repentance as being an external symbol of the 
inward change (Acts xiii. 24, xix. 4). The repentance precedes 
the baptism, which seals it and reminds the baptized of his new 
obligations. To submit to this baptism was to confess that one 
was a sinner, and to pledge oneself to a new life. The " change 
of mind " x (jucraWa) has reference both to past deeds and to future 
purposes, and is the result of a realization of their true moral 
significance (Wsctt. on Heb. vi. i, 6, xii. 17). This inward 
change is specially insisted upon in the account of John's preach- 
ing m Jos. Ant. xviii. 5. 2. The word is rare in Mt (iii. 8, n) 
and ML (i. 4), and does not occur in Jn. It is freq. in Lk. (ver. 8, 
v. 32, xv. 7, xxiv. 47; Acts v. 31, xi. 18, etc.). We find it hi 
Jos. Ant xiii. n. 3 of Anstobulus after the murder of his brother; 
in Plut. Pericles ) x., of the Athenians after the banishment of 
Cimon ; and in Thuc. iii. 36. 3 of the Athenians after the sentence 
on Mitylene. See American Ch. Rev. No. 134, pp. 143 ff. John's 
"repentance baptism" was els ctye<rii> dfxapTiw^ This was its 
purpose, assuring the penitent of forgiveness, and of deliverance 
from the burden, penalty, and bondage of sin (Trench, Syn. xxxiii.; 
Crem. Lex. p. 297 : comp. Lk. i. 77 ; Acts ii. 38; Heb. x. 18). 

4. > pipXw Xoyw^ With the exception of Phil. iv. 3, h 
is peculiar to Lk. (xx. 42 ; Acts L 20, vil 42). The form 
is usual where the meaning is a writing or document, /?v/3Xos where 
the plant or papyrus as writing material is intended (Hdt ii. 96. 3, 
v. 58. 3). For \6yoi in the sense of the "utterances of a teacher 
or prophet " comp. Acts xx. 35 ; Amos L i. 

4>wi/fj POWJTOS , . * T&S Tpi|3ous ttuToG. From Mt iii. 3 and Mk. 
i. 3 we see that, in the tradition of which all three make use, these 
words were quoted as applying to the Baptist This is therefore 
a primitive interpretation; and we learn from Jn. i. 23 that it 
originated with the Baptist himself. John was a <O>T/I? making 
known the Aoyos. " The whole man was a sermon." The message 
was more than the messenger, and hence the messenger is regarded 

1 Lactantius, in writing de Pcenitentia prefers resipiscentia as a better, al- 
though still inadequate, rendering. Js emm guem Jaeti sttt pcemUt, errorettt 
suum prtstinum vntelhgit ; ideoque Grteci mehus et significantius fj^rdvouuf 
dicunt) quam nos latine possumus resipiscentiam dicere. Restpiscit aum mt 
auittem smm quad ab insama reafit t etc. (Div. /?w/, vL 24* 6). 


as mainly a voice. Jn. has dQvvarc for dift&as frote&r* (i. 2 3), and 
this looks as if he were translating direct from the Hebrew, which 
has one word and not two. The quotation in the other three is 
identical, and (with the substitution of avrov for rov eow [fjp&v]) 
verbatim as LXX. Lk. quotes Is. xL 4, 5 as well as xL 3, and 
here slightly varies from LXX, having ^0as for 0e2dv, and at 
rpaxcicu *fe oSovs Xctas for 17 rpa^eta 6is TreSicu 1 

iv TJJ ep^fjtw. It is possible to take these words with croc/icfo-arc 
rather than with favr) /3ou>vros : but here, as in Mt and ML, the 
latter arrangement is more natural wx clamantis in deserto. 
Barnabas (ix. 3) connects them with /?ovros. It is evident from 
the scenery which is mentioned that it is in a desert that the road 
for the coming King has to be made. The details symbolize the 
moral obstacles which have to be removed by the repentance 
baptism of John, in order to prepare the people for the reception 
of the Messiah, or (as some prefer) of Jehovah (Is. xxxv. 8-10). 
That Lk. means the Messiah is shown by the substitution of avroS 
for rov eov : and that this interpretation is in accordance with the 
primitive tradition is shown by the fact that all three Gospels have 
this substitution. Just as Oriental monarchs, when making a royal 
progress, send a courier before them to exhort the population to 
prepare roads, so the Messiah sends His herald to exhort His own 
people (Jn. L n) to prepare their hearts for His coming. 

5. ^aptiyf. " A valley shut in by precipices, a ravine " ; here only in 
N.T., but found in LXX (Judith ii. 8) and in class. Grk. (Thuc. ii. 67. 4). 
It is perhaps from the same root as fapduss" plough" and fffro=s st bore." 

|3ow<fc. Herodotus seems to imply that this as a Cyrenaic word (iv. 
199. 2) : but it is freq. in later writers and in LXX. Comp. rriii. 30, and 
for the sense Zech. iv. 7 ; Is. zL 4* 

Icrrai T& o-jtoXiA els, K.T.X. "The crooked places shall become 
straight ways, and the rough ways smooth ways " : ie. roads shall 
be made where there were none before, and bad roads shall be 
made good roads. Comp. the account of Vespasian's march into 
Galilee, especially the work of the pioneers (Jos. B.J. iii 6. 2). 

6. iroora <rdp. Everywhere in N.T. this expression seems to 
refer to the human race only ; so even Mt xxiv. 22 ; ML xiiL 20 ; 
i Pet L 24; comp. Acts ii 17; Rom. iiL 20. Fallen man, man 
in his frailty and need of help, is meant In LXX it often in- 
cludes the brutes: Gen. vi 19, vii. 15, 16, 21, viiL 17, ix.ii, 

1 Ewald says of the prophecy of which these verses form the introduction, that 
" it is not only the most comprehensive, but also, in respect of its real prophetic 
subject-matter, the weightiest piece of that time, and altogether one of the most 
important portions of the O.T., and one of the richest in influence for all future 
time. ... It is especially the thought of the passing away of the old tune, 
and the flourishing of the new, which is the life of the piece " (Prophets of O* T* t 
Eng. tr, iv. pp. 244, 254; comp. pp. 257, 259). 


15, 16, 17 ; Ps. cxxxvi. 25; Jer. xxxii. 27, xlv. 5. The phrase is 
one of many which occur frequently in Is. xl.-lxvL, but not at all 
in the earlier chapters (Driver, Isaiah, p. 197). 

TO crum^piop. It was obviously for the sake of this declaration 
that Lk. continued the quotation thus far. That "the salvation 
of God " is to be made known to the whole human race is the 
main theme of his Gospel 

7-17. John's Preaching and its Effects. This section gives us 
the burden of his preaching ^EXeyev, imperf.) in accordance (o8v) 
with the character which has just been indicated. The herald who 
has to see that hearts are prepared for the Messiah must be stern 
with hypocrites and with hardened sinners, because the impenitent 
cannot escape punishment (7-9) ; must supply different treatment 
for different classes (10-14; comp. ver. 5); and must declare the 
certainty of his Master's coming and of its consequences (15-17). 

7. "EXeyep ofo " He used to say, therefore " : being the pre- 
dicted Forerunner, his utterances were of this character. We need 
not regard this as a report of what was said on any one occasion, 
but as a summary of what he was m the habit of saying during his 
ministry to the multitudes who came out of the towns and villages 
(ZKiropeoopevoLs) into the wilderness to hear the Prophet and gain 
something from him. Mt (lii. 7) represents this severe rebuke as 
addressed to the Pharisees and Sadducees; which confirms the 
view that Lk. is here giving us the substance of the preaching 
rather than what John said on some particular day. What he 
said to some was also said to all; and as the salvation offered was 
universal, so also was the sin. This is thoroughly characteristic of Lk. 

pairTur&jwt. As a substitute for repentance, or as some magical 
rite, which would confer a benefit on them independently of their 
moral condition. Their desire for his baptism showed their belief 
in him as a Prophet; otherwise the baptism would have been 
valueless (Jn. i. 25 ; comp. Zech. xiii. i ; Ezek. xxxvi. 25). Hence 
the indignation of John's disciples when they heard of Jesus 
baptizing, a rite which they regarded as their master's prerogative 
(Jn. iii. 26). The title 6 Paimo-Tys or 6 /3airrl<w shows that his 
baptism was regarded as something exceptional and not an ordinary 
purification (Jos. Ant. xviii. 5. 2). Its exceptional character con- 
sisted in (r) its application to the whole nation, which had become 
polluted ; (2) its being a preparation for the more perfect baptism 
of the Messiah. It is only when baptism is administered by im- 
mersion that its full significance is seen. 

is intensive from pdirrw, like /faXXgto from rf\Xw : /3cfarrw, " I 
dip " j /Sarr/^w, " I immerse." TevirffMra is " offspring " of animals or men 
(Ecclus. x. 18) ; "fruits" of the earth or of plants (Deut. xxviii. 4, n, 18, 42, 
5; Mt. xxvi. 29; Mk. ziv. 255 Lk, zxu, 18); "rewards" : righteousness 
(Hos, z. 12 ; 2 Cor. ix. 10). 


i%&w>v. Genimina (Vulg.) or generatio (b ffiz 1 q r) or 
progenies (acdef) vtferarum. In Mt this is addressed to the 
Pharisees, first by John and afterwards by Jesus (lii. 7, xii. 34, 
xxiii. 33). It indicates another parentage than that of Abraham 
(Jn. viii. 44), and is perhaps purposely used in opposition to their 
trust in their descent: comp. Aesch. Cko. 249; Soph. Ant 531. 
John's metaphors, like those of the prophecy (ver. 5), are from the 
wilderness , vipers, stones, and barren trees. It is from this stern, 
but fresh and undesecrated region, and not from the " Holy," but 
polluted City, that the regenerating movement proceeds (Is. xli. 
1 8). These serpent-like characters are the ovcoXra that must be 
made straight Comp. Ps. Iviii. 4, cxL 3, 

far^cilcy. "Suggested" by showing to eye or ear: vL 47, 
xii. 5; Acts ix. 16, xx. 35; elsewhere in N.T. only Mt. iii, 7. 

rfjs jjL6\XoJair|s 6pY*js. It is possible that this refers primarily to 
the national judgments involved in the destruction of Jerusalem 
and the banishment of the Jews (xxi. 23; i Mac. i. 64); but the 
penalties to be inflicted at the last day are probably included 
(Rom. i. 1 8, ii. 5, 8, iii. 5, v. 9). The Jews believed that the judg- 
ments of God, especially hi connexion with the coming of the 
Messiah, as threatened by the Prophets (Joel ii. 31; MaL iii. 2, 
iv. i ; Is. xiii. 9), were to be executed on the heathen. The Baptist 
proclaims that there is no such distinction. Salvation is for all 
who prepare their hearts to receive the Messiah ; judgment, for all 
who harden then: hearts and reject Him. Birth is of no avail 

8. iro^o-arc ofo Kapiroi>s dftous T. p. " If you desire to escape 
this wrath and to welcome the Messiah (ow), repent, and act at 
once (aor. imperat) as those who repent" Comp. xx, 24; Acts 
iii. 4, viL 33, ix. n, xvi. 9, xxi. 39, xxu. 13 ; and see Win. xliii. 3. a, 
p. 393- Mt has KapirAv (iii. 8), which treats the series of acts as a 
collective result Comp. S. Paul's summary of his own preaching, 
CSp. aia rojs /icravowis Ipyo irpatro'ovras (Acts XXVL 20). 

It was a Rabbinical saying, * If Israel would repent only one day, the 
Son of David would come forthwith** ; and again, " If Israel would observe 
only one sabbath according to the ordinance, forthwith would the Son of 
David come" ; and, "All the stages are passed, and all depends solely on 
repentance and good works." 

The phrase iroteZv Kapnrbw is not necessarily a Hebraism (Gen. L 1 1, 12) : 
u occurs Arist, D$ Plant, i, 4, p. 819, ii, 10, p. 829. Comp. Jas. iii. 12 } 
Mk, iv. 32. 

jjrf) apfr)<r0. " Do not even begin to have this thought in your 
minds." Omnem excusationis etiam conatum prxcidit (Beng.). If 
there are any passages in which apxo^ai with an infin. is a mere 
periphrasis for the simple verb (xx. 9), this is not one of them. 
See Win. bcv. 7. d, p. 767; Grim-Thay. p. 79; Fritzsche on Mt 
xvi 21, p. 539. Xtycip iv laurois. "To say within yourselves* 


rather than " among yourselves." Comp. vii. 49 and Aeycre cr/ rats 
*ca/>8wus vfjL&v (Ps. iv. 5). For the perennial boast about their 
descent from Abraham comp. Jn. viii. 33, 53 ; Jas. li. 21; 2 Esdr. 
vL 56-58 ; Jos. Ant hi. 5. 3 ; B. /. v. 9. 4 ; Wetst. on Mt iii. 9 

IK TW \L0o>K ToJrwi'. There is a play upon words between 
"children" (banlm) and "stones" (abanim). It was God who 
made Abraham to be the rock whence the Jews were hewn (Is. 
1L i, 2) ; and out of the most unpromising material He can make 
genuine children of Abraham (Rom. iv., ix. 6, 7, xi. 13-24; Gal. 
iv. 21-31). The verb cyelpai is applicable to both stones and 

9. TJS-rj. " Although you do not at all expect it." The image 
of the axe is in harmony with that of the fruits (ver. 8). In the 
East trees are valued mainly for their fruit ; and trees which pro- 
duce none are usually cut down. " And even now also the axe is 
laid unto the root" 

The irprfs after Kctrai may be explained either, " is brought to the root 
and lies there "; or, "lies directed towards the root." In either case the 
meaning is that judgment is not only inevitable, but will come speedily: 
hence the piesents, cKKOTrrErai and paXXerai. 

The 8f Kal(m Mt. simply W) is Lk.'s favourite method of giving emphasis ; 
ver. 12, ii. 4, iv. 41, v. 10, 36, ix. 61, x. 32, xi. 18, xii. 54, 57, xiv. 12, 
xvi. I, 22, xvui. 9, xix. 19, xx. 12. For prf with a participle, expressing a 
reason or condition, comp. 11. 45, vii, 30, n. 24, xn. 47, xxiv. 23 ; Acts xi. 26, 
xvii. 6, xxi. 34, xxvii. 7 ; and see Win. Iv. 5 (), p. 607. For eKKtnrrciP, " to 
cut ofiF," of felling trees, comp. xiii. 7, 9 ; HdL ix. 97. I. See notes on 
vi. 43. 

10-14. John's Different Treatment of Different Classes. Peculiar 
to Lk., but probably from the same source as the preceding verses. 
It shows that, in levelling the mountains and raising the valleys, 
eta (ver. 5), he did not insist upon any extraordinary penances or 
" counsels of perfection." Each class is to forsake its besetting 
sin, and all are to do their duty to their neighbour. The stern 
warnings of the Baptist made the rulers leave in disgust without 
seeking baptism at his hands (vii. 30 ; ML xxi. 25) ; but they made 
the multitude anxious to comply with the conditions for avoiding 
the threatened judgment 

10. cmipuTO)^. " Continually put this question." The notion 
of repetition comes from the imperf. and not, as in en-an-eii/ (xvi. 3, 
xviii. 35), from the em, which in r/>a>TCH> indicates the direction of 
the inquiry; Plato, Soph. 249 E, 250. Comp. etr&oQvi in iv. 17. 

Ti ouy ironrjo-wfjLcv; "What then, if the severe things which thou 
sayest are true, must we do?" For the conjunctivas deliberations 
comp. xxiil 31; Mt xxvi. 54; Mk. xii. 14; Jn. xii. 27 ; and see 
Win. xii. 4. b, p. 356; Matth. 515. 2; Arnold's Madvig^ p. 99; 
Green, p. 150. 

11. 8uo xiT&was. The \ir^v was the tinder and less necessary 


garment, distinguished from the upper and almost indispensable 
Ifjidriov; vi. 29; Acts ix. 39; ML v. 40; Jn. xix. 23. When two of 
these x"oii/es were worn at once, the under one or shirt would be the 
Hebrew cetoneth^ the upper would be the Hebrew met!, which was 
longer than the cetoneth. It was common for travellers to wear two 
(Jos. Ant. xvii. 5. 7) ; but Christ forbade the disciples to do so 
(ix. 3 ; ML x. 10). It is not implied here that the two are being 
worn simultaneously. See Trench, Syn. 1. , Conder, Handb. of B. 
p. 195; Z>..#. 2 art "Dress"; Schaffs Herzog, art. "Clothing and 
Ornaments of the Hebrews." If the owner of two shirts is to " give 
a share" (jxeraSoTo)), he will give one shirt. Comp. Rom. i. n, 
xii. 8 ; and contrast Peter's reply to the same question Acts u. 37, 
38, With regard to ppwfwwa, nothing is said or implied about 
having superfluity or abundance. He who has any food is to 
share it with the starving. Comp. i Thes. ii. 8. 

This verse is one of those cited to support the view that Lk. is Ebiomte in 
his sympathies, a view maintained uncompromisingly by Renan (Les Evangtles, 
ch. xm.; K de /. chs. x., xi.), and by Campbell (Critical Studies in St. Luke, 
p. 193). For the answer see Bishop Alexander (Leading Ideas of the Gospel, 
p. 170). Here it is to be noticed that it is ML and Mk. who recoid, while Lk. 
omits, the poor clothing and poor food of the Baptist himself ; and that it is ML 
who represents his sternest words as being addressed to the wealthy Pharisees 
and Sadducees, while Lk. directs them against the multitudes generally. 

12. T\wmi. From reXy (ML xvii. 25 ; Rom. xiii. 7) and 
; so that etymologically reA-toi/at publicani, " those who 

bought or farmed the taxes " under the Roman governmenL But 
in usage reA-oh/at portitores^ "those who collected the taxes" for 
ft&pubhcanL This usage is common elsewhere, and invariable in 
N.T. Sometimes, and perhaps often, there was an intermediate 
agent between the reXwvot and the publicani^ eg. apxir&<*>vy$ or 
magister (xix. 2). 

These "tax-collectors" were detested everywhere, because of their oppres- 
siveness and fraud, and were classed with the vilest of mankind : Atot%oi aZ 
Topyo/Socr/coi /cat reXQvat, /cai /c6Xajces jrat cru/co<ajTcu, ical rotoCroj #/u\o$ r? Tdvra 
KVK&VTWV ev r$ fily (Lucian. Necyomant* xL; comp. Anstoph. JSqutt. 248; 
Theophr. Charac. vi.; Grotius, m loco ; Wetst. on Mt. v. 46). The Jews especi- 
ally abhorred them as bloodsuckers for a heathen conqueror. For a J[ew to 
enter such a service was the most utter degradation. He was excommunicated, 
and his whole family was regarded as disgraced. But the Romans allowed the 
Herods to retain some powers of taxation ; and therefore not all tax-collectors 
in Palestine were in the service of Rome* Yet the characteristic faults of 
the profession prevailed, whether the money was collected in the name of Caesar 
or of Herod ; and what these were is indicated by the Baptist's answer. See 
Lightfoot, Optra) i. pp. 324, 325; Herzog, PRE? art Zott\ Edersh. Z. <&* T. i. 
p. 515- 

13. AtSdtncoXe. Publicani majore afcris reverentia utuntut 

vXlov vapo. For rapd after comparatives comp. Heb. L 4, iiL 3, be. 23, 


xl 4, adi. 24; Hdt. vii. 103. 6; Thuc. L 23. 4, iv, 6. x. The effect is to 
intensify the notion of excess : so also Mp t xvi. 8 ; Heb. iv. 12. 

T& SiaTcTdYfJ^oK. "That which stands prescribed" (perf.); 
a favourite word with Lk.: viii. 55; xvii. 9, 10; Acts vii. 44, xvin. 2, 
xx. 13, xxiii. 31, xxiv. 23. Comp. tisponere, \erordnen. It is from 
the general meaning of "transacting business" that irpdacreii' 
acquires the special sense of " exacting tribute, extorting money " : 
comp. xix. 23. This use is found from Herodotus onwards : Hdt 
iii. 58.4; ^Esch. Cho. 311; Pers. 476; Eum. 624; Xen. Anab. 
vii. 6. 17 : comp. Trpa/crcop, cMrirpacraeiv, eKTrpacrcreii/, and many 
illustrations in Wetst Agere is similarly used : fublicum qtiadra- 
gesimx in Asia egit (Suet. Vesp* i.); but what follows is of interest 
as showing how rare an honourable publicanus was : manebantque 
imagines in cimtatibus ei posit& sub hoc titulo KAAOS TEAONH- 
SANTL This is said of Sabinus, father of Vespasian. After farm- 
ing the quadragesima tax in Ask he was a money-lender among 
the HelvetiL It is to be noticed that the Baptist does not con- 
demn the calling of a tax-collector as unlawful for a Jew. He 
assumes that these reX&vai, will continue to act as such. 

14. oTpareuojjicyoi. " Men on service, on military duty " ; mili- 
tantes rather than milites (Vulg.). In 2 Tim. ii. 4, o^Sets crrpareuo- 
yxevo? is rightly rendered nemo militans. Who these "men on 
service " were cannot be determined ; but they were Jewish soldiers 
and not Roman, and not on service in the war between Antipas and 
his father-in-law Aretas about the former's repudiation of the latter*s 
daughter in order to make room for Herodias, That war took 
place after the Baptist's death (Jos. Ant. xviii. 5. 2), two or three 
years later than this, and probably A.D. 32 (Lewiii, Fasti Sacri^ 
1171, 1412). These crrpareuopevoi, were possibly gendarmerie, 
soldiers acting as police, perhaps in support of the tax-collectors. 
Such persons, as some modern nations know to their cost, have 
great opportunities for bullying and delation. By their icat ^tels 
they seem to connect themselves with the rcXwvat, either as know- 
ing that they also were unpopular, or as expecting a similar answer 
from John. 

MujB^a SiacreicnjTe. Like toncutio, 8iacr> is used of intimida- 
tion, especially of intimidating to extort money (3 Mac. vii 21). 
Eusebius uses it of the extortions of Paul of Samosata (H. J. 
vii- 3' 7) > where, however, the true reading may be IKOWI. In 
this sense cra> also is used (Aristoph. Equit 840; Pax, 639) ; and 
it is interesting to see that Antipho couples <rto> with o-v/co^avrto. 
^iXoKpanys ovrocri erepovs rwv vTrev^eiWv ctrcie /cat co > UKO<fxtT(. (Orat* 
vL p. 146, L 22). 1 This last passage, combined with the verse 

1 In the Passio S. Perpcfu, Hi., the martyr suffers much ffrparuuruv OTMCO^CW- 
riots rXeforau, and this is represented in the Latin by concussur& mihtum* 
Comp. Tert Dt Fuga tn Pers. aoi., xuL 


before us, renders it probable that trvKo^dvrrjs, a " fig-shower," is 
not one who gives information to the police about the exportation 
of figs, but one who shows figs by shaking ^& tree ; i.e. who makes 
the rich yield money by intimidating them. Nowhere is <rv/eo- 
$ai/T7?s found in the sense of " informer," nor yet of " sycophant" 
It always denotes a "false accuser," especially with a view to 
obtaining money; Arist. Ach. 559, 825, 828. Hatch quotes from 
Brunet de Presle, Notices et textes du Mus'ee du Louvre, a letter of 
B.C. 145 from Dioscorides, a chief officer of finance, to his sub- 
ordinate Dorion : irepl <$ Siaorcto-ji.^ /cat irapaXeL&v evtwv Sc KOL 
GruKOcfxttTeurdcu jrpocr^po/xa'wv /3ovX6p,6a fyt.a? py StakavOdvew, 
ic.T.X, " in the matter of fictitious legal proceedings and plunder- 
ings, some persons being, moreover, alleged to be even made the 
victims of false accusations," etc. (BibL Grk. p. 91). Comp. Lev. 
xix. ii ; Job xxiv. 9. Hesychius explains cnjAco^avnys as i^cuSo- 

d\|/owots. From S^rov, "cooked food" to be eaten with bread, 
and (ui/co/wu, "I buy": hence "rations, allowance, pay" of a 
soldier; i Cor. ix. 7; i Mac. iii. 28, xiv. 32; i Esdr. iv. 56; and 
freq. in Polybius. John does not tell these men on service that 
theirs is an unlawful calling. Nor did the early Christians con- 
demn the life of a soldier : see quotations in Grotius and J. B. 
Mozley, University Sermons, Serm. v. 

16-17. The certainty of the Messiah's Coming and the Conse- 
quences of the Coming. Mt iii. 11, 12. The explanatory open- 
ing (ver. 1 5) is peculiar to Lk. The substance of ver. 16 is common 
to all three; but here Lk. inserts the characteristic ira<riv. In 
ver. 17 he and Mt. are together, while Mk. is silent Lk. shows 
more clearly than the other two how intense was the excitement 
which the Baptist's preaching caused. 

15. ripoaBoKwiTos. What were they expecting ? The result of all 
this strange preaching, and especially the Messianic judgment 
Would it be put in execution by John himself? For this absolute 
use of flrpoo-Sojeao) comp. Acts xxvii. 33. Excepting Mt xL 13, 
xxiv. 50, 2 Pet iil 12-14, the verb is peculiar to LL (L 21, vii 
19, 20, viiL 40, xii 46; Acts iii. 5, etc.). 

The Vulg. here has the strange rendering exitfimantt although in L 21, 
vii. 19, 20, viii. 40 TpordoKdu is rendered txpccto> and in ziL 46 spero. Cod* 
Bnx. has sfierantc here. See on xir. 43 and xxi. 23, 25 for other slips in 
Jerome's work. Here d has an attempt to reproduce the gen. abs. m 
et cogitantium omnium. Comp. ix. 43, xix. II, xxL 5, xxiv. 36, 41. 

fi,^ irore afi-nfe. " If haply he himself were the Christ w Their 
thinking this possible, although "John did no sign," and had none 
of the insignia of royalty, not even descent from David, is remark- 
able. Non ita crassam adhuc ideam de Christo kabebant* nam 


Johannes nil splendoris externi habebat et tamen talia de eo cogtta* 
bant (Beng.). That this question had been raised is shown by 
Jn. L 20. The Baptist would not have declared " I am not the 
Christ," unless he had been asked whether he was the Messiah, or 
had heard the people discussing the point 

For the constr. comp. ftf w* ffyi avrois 6 9edy /*ercCyoiai> (2 Tim. ii. 25). 
The opt. in indirect questions is freq. in Lk. both without &v (i. 29, vm. 9, 
Acts xvii. n, xxL 33) and also with to (i. 62, vi II, rv. 26; Acts v. 24, 
x. 17). 

16. irooiK. Showing how universal the excitement on this point 
was. Neither ML (iii. n) nor Mk. (i. 7) has the ira.<riv of which 
Luke is so fond : comp. vi 30, vii. 35, ix. 43, xi. 4, xii. 10. 

The aor. mid. is rare in N.T. (xxiii. 9; Acts in. 12 ; Mt 
xxvii. 12; Mk. xiv. 61; Jn. v. 17, 19); also in LXX (Judg. v. 29; I Kings 
H. i j I Chron. x. 13 ; Ezek. ix.ii). In bibl. Grlc. the pass, forms prevail: 
see small print on i. 19. 

'Eyo) [lei* uSon. Both with emphasis : "/with water" 

6 IcrxupoTcpos. Valebat Johannes^ sed Christus multoplus (Beng.). 
The art marks him as one who ought to be well known. 

Xoom T&K Indira TW fa&fipfaw. More graphic than Mt.'s ra 
wroS. /?aorao-ai, but less SO than Mk.'s /cvi/ras Xvcrat TOV I/JL. rail/ inroB. 
avrov. Both AV. and RV. mark the difference between 71-0817/^0, 
"that which is bound under" the foot, and 0-avSoA.tov, dim. of 
oravSaXoj/, by rendering the former "shoe" (x. 4, xv. 22, xxu. 35; 
Acts viL 33, xui 25) and the other "sandal" (Mt vi. 9; Acts 
xii 8). The Vulg. has calceamenta for v^-oS^/Aara, and sandalia or 
callgss, for o-avSoXta. In LXX the two words seem to be used 
indiscriminately (Josh. ix. 5, 13); but wroS. is much the more 
common, and it is doubtful whether the Jews before the Captivity 
wore shoes or manalim (Deut xxxiii. 25) as distinct from sandals. 
Comp. ot ijtiavT5 rtov woST^aTwv avrwv (Is. v. 27). To unfasten 
shoes or sandals, when a man returned home, or to bring them to 
him when he went out, was the office of a slave (See Wetst on ML 
iii. u). John is not worthy to be the bond-servant of the Christ 
The afiroG is not so entirely redundant as in some other passages : 
"whose latchet of his shoes." 1 

auT<$s. In emphatic contrast to the speaker. 

iv ir^eufJtaTt dytw. See on L 15, That the & with irvcuftan 
ayta> and its absence from vSart, marks a distinction of any great 
moment, either here or Acts i. 5, must be doubted ; for in Mt 
iii. u both expressions have the Iv, and in Mk. i. 8 neither. The 
simple dat marks the instrument or matter with which the baptism 

1 Comp. Mk. vii. 25 ; i Pet ii. 24; Rev. iii. 8, vii. 2, 9, xiii. 8, aoc, 8. 
Such pleonasms are Hebraistic, and are specially common in LXX (Gen. L iij 
Exod. xxxv. 29, etc.) ; Win. xxii. 4 (b), p. 184. 


is effected ; the lv marks the element in which it takes place (Jn. 

i 31)- 

Kdl irupu This remarkable addition is wanting in Mk, Various 
explanations of it are suggested, (i) That the fiery tongues at 
Pentecost are meant, is improbable. Were any of those who 
received the Spirit at Pentecost among the Baptist's hearers on 
this occasion? Moreover, in Acts i. 5 KO! irupL is not added. 
(2) That it distinguishes two baptisms, the penitent with the 
Spirit, and the impenitent with penal fire, is very improbable. 
The same persons (fytas) are to be baptized with the Spirit and 
with fire. In ver. 17 the good and the bad are separated, but not 
here. This sentence must not be made parallel to what follows, 
for the winnowing-shovel is not baptism. (3) More probably the 
irupi refers to the illuminating, kindling, and purifying power of 
the grace given by the Messiah's baptism. Spiritus sanctus^ quo 
Ckristus baptizat) igneam vim kabet: atque ea vis ignea etiam 
conspicua fuit oculis koninum (Beng.) : comp. Mai. iii. 2. (4) Or, 
the fiery trials which await the disciple who accepts Christ's 
baptism may be meant: comp. xii. 50; Mk. x. 38, 39. The 
passage is one of many, the exact meaning of which must remain 
doubtful ; but the purifying of the believer rather than the punish- 
ment of die unbeliever seems to be intended. 

17. irrJov. The " winnowing-shovd " (pala Hgnea\ Vulg. 
ventilabrum\ with which the threshed corn was thrown up into 
the wind (imfa = " spit ").* This is a further description of the 
Messiah, He whose imiw is ready for use. Note the impressive 
repetition of avroO after rfi x t pt> ^ v oA-cova, and rrjv diro0iqKr}v? 

T$J v aXuyo. The threshing-floor itself, and not its contents 
It is by removing the contents corn to the barn, and refuse to 
the fire that the floor is thoroughly cleansed. Christ's threshing- 
floor is the world ; or, in a more restricted sense, the Holy Land. 
See Meyer on Mt iii. 12. 

dap&rru. Comp. Mk. ix. 43; Lev, vi 12, 13; Is. xxxiv. 8-10, 
IxvL 24 ; Jer. vii. 20 ; Ezek. xx. 47, 48. In Homer it is a freq. 
epithet of ye\<os, /cAc'os, ficrf, /iei>os, and once of <f>Mg (//. xvi. 123). 
As an epithet of irup it is opposed to /uiX0a/coy and fca/epoy. See 

1 The wooden shovel, pala Kgnea (Cato, & R. vi. 45. 151), ventilabrum 
(Varro, A R. L 52), seems to have been more primitive than the vannus, which 
was a basket, shaped like the blade of a large shoveL The rr&ov was a shovel 
rather than a basket. In Tertullian (PrsBscrip. iii.) palam in manu ported ad 
purgandam aream sttam is probably the true reading : but some MSS. have 
venttlabrum for palam. 

3 The form &a*ada/xu is worth noting : in later Greek &<0apa for tedd-ripa, 
is not uncommon. Mt. here has fftaica^aptet, but classical writers prefer 5ta- 
jcadal/Kt? to StafcaOaptfear. ^For the details of Oriental threshing see Herzog, 
PRE.* art. Ackerbau; D.B* art. "Agriculture." For d%vpa comp. Job 
xxL 18, and Hdt iv. 72, 2 ; the sing, is less common (Jer. zxiii. 28) 


Heinichen on Eus. H. J. vi. 41. 15 and viii. 12. i. It is therefore 
a fierce fire which cannot be extinguished, rather than ar endless 
fire that will never go out, that seems to be indicated : and this is 
just such a fire as TO fyvpov (the refuse left after threshing and 
winnowing) would make. But acr/Seoros is sometimes used of a 
fire that never goes out, as that of Apollo at Delphi or of Vesta at 
Rome (Dion. Hal. cxciv. 8). For KctTaicaiii> comp. Mt. xiii. 30, 
40 ; also Ex. iii. 2, where it is distinguished from Kaictv : it implies 
utter consumption. 

18-20. Explanation of the Abrupt Termination of the 
Baptist's Ministry. This is given here by anticipation in order 
tc complete the narrative, Comp. the conclusions to previous 
narratives L 66, 80, iL 40, 52. 

18. PloXKa per oiv Kal Ircpcu The comprehensive iroXAA ical 
Irepa confirms the view taken above (ver. 7) that this narrative 
(7-18) gives a summary of John's teaching rather than a report of 
what was said on any one occasion. The erepa means "of a 
different kind " (Gal. i. 6, 7), and intimates that the preaching of 
the Baptist was not always of the character just indicated. 

The cases in which pv ofo occurs must be distinguished. I. Where, as 
here, iuh is followed by a corresponding 5^, and we have nothing more than 
the distributive pbr . . . ft . . . combined with ofo (Acts vin. 4, 25, xi. 19, 
xii, 5, xiv. 3, zv. 3, 30, etc.). 2. Where no 84 follows, and pAv confirms 
what is said, while ofo> marks an inference or transition, quidem igztur (Acts 
i 6, ii. 41, v. 41, xiii. 4, xvii. 30 ; Heb* vu. II, vul 4, etc.). Win. hii. 8. a, 
p. 556. 

irapaicaXwi> efyyycXiJeTO . . . IXeyx^jwros. These words give 
the three chief functions of the Baptist : to exhort all, to preach 
good tidings to the penitent, to reprove the impenitent It is 
quite unnecessary to take rov AaoV with irapcucaXajv, and the order 
of the words is against such a combination. 

In late Greek the ace. of the/^w to wJum the announcement is made ia 
freq. after evayycMfrffdau. (Acts xiv. 15, xvi. 10 ; Gal, i. 9 ; I Pet. i 12 ; 
comp. Acts vui. 25, 40, xiv. 21) : and hence in the pass, we have irrw^oi 
etfa7yeXJ0mu : The ace. of the message announced is also common (viii. I ; 
Acts v. 42, vui. 4, 12, x. 36, xi. 20). Where both person and message are 
combined, the person addressed is in the dat (i. 19, 11. 10, iv 43 ; Act* 
viii. 35 ; comp. Lk. iv. 18 j Acts xvii. 18; Rom. i 15, etc ) : but in Acts 
xiii. 32 we have double ace. Here the Lat texts vary between cvangehzabat 
(Cod. Am.) and eoang. gopulo (Cod. Brix.). 

19. *Hpw8tjs. Antipas, as in ver. i. The insertion of the 
name 3>tA.Mnrov after ywawcos comes from Mk. and Mt (A C K X 
and some versions). This Philip must be carefully distinguished 
from the tetrarch Philip, with whom Jerome confuses him. He 
was the son of Mariamne, on account of whose treachery he had 
been disinherited by Herod the Great; and he lived as a private 


individual at Jerusalem (Jos. B.J. i. 30. 7). Josephus calls both 
Antipas and also this Philip simply " Herod " (Ant xviii. 5. 4). 
Herodias became the evil genius of the man who seduced her from 
his brother. It was her ambition which brought about the down- 
fall of Antipas. Lk. alone tells us that John rebuked Antipas for 
his wicked life (KCU irepl Ttdrrw) as well as for his incestuous 
marriage. Obviously cXeyxfy 6 '' * means "rebuked, reproved" 
^i Tim. v. 20; 2 Tim. iv. 2), and not "convicted" or "convinced** 
(Jn. viii. 46, xvi. 8). In the former sense eAcvxctv is stronger 
than lirLTipfv : see Trench, Syn. iv, 

Once more (see on ver. i) we have a remarkable rendering in d : Hcrodcs 
autem quaterducatus cum argueretur ab eo> etc. 

Note the characteristic and idiomatic attraction (ird.vTwv &p) t andcomp. 
ii. 20, v. 9, ix. 43, xii 46, xv. 16, xix. 37, xxiv. 25 5 Acts ui 21, x. 39, 
liii. 39, xxii. IO, xxvi. 2. 

20. irpoo-^dyjicei' ica! TOUTO im irao-ir, KaTetcXeicrev, K.T.X. "He 
added this also on the top of all he shut up John in prison " ; 
i.e. he added this to all the other iroviypa of which he had been 

Josephus, in the famous passage which confirms and supple- 
ments the Gospel narrative respecting the Baptist (Ant. xviii. 5. 2), 
says that Antipas put him in prison because of his immense 
influence with the people. They seemed to be ready to do what- 
ever he told them ; and he might tell them to revolt. This may 
easily have been an additional reason for imprisoning him : it is no 
contradiction of the Evangelists. What Josephus states is what 
Antipas publicly alleged as his reason for arresting John : of course 
he would not give his private reasons. The prison in which the 
Baptist was confined was in the fortress of Machserus at the N.E. 
corner of the Dead Sea, Seetzen discovered the site in 1807 
above the valley of the Zerka, and dungeons can still be traced 
among the ruins. Tristram visited it in 1872 (Discoveries on the 
East Side of the Dead Sea, ch. xiv.). It was hither that the 
daughter of Aretas fled on her way back to her father, when she 
discovered that Antipas meant to discard her for Herodias. 
Machserus was then in her father's dominions; but Antipaa 
probably seized it immediately afterwards (Jos. Ant. xviiL 5. i, 2). 

The expression xpotr^rcei' rowro, jrar&Xeeo-eF must not be confounded 
with the Hebraisms TrpocrtQero rfyipat (xx. XI, 12), irpoo-t&ero wKXapeur 
(Acts xiL 3). It is true that in LXX the act as well as the mid. is used in 
this manner: T/xxr^ice rcefc (Gen. iv. 2); vfwrtdijicc XaX^rew (Gen. 
xviii. 29) : see also Exod. x. 28 ; Deut iii. 26 ; and for the mid. Exod. 
xiv. 13. But in this Hebraistic use of trpwrrlBvuu, for "go on and do" the 
second verb is always in the infin. (Win. liv. 5, p. 588). Here there is no 
Hebraism, and therefore no sign that Lk. is using an Aramaic source. 

Ka,T<tK\ciciv is classical, but occurs in N.T. only here and Acts xxvi. 10 j 
In both cases of imprisoning. It is freq. in medical writers, and Galen uset 



it of imprisonment (Hobart, Msd. Lang, of Lk. pp. 66, 67). Mt. xiv 3 wt 
have dir&ero, and Mk. vL Vj % &7<w, of Herod's putting John i ito prison. 

SI, 22. Jesus is baptized by John. It is remarkable, that 
although the careers of the Forerunner and of the Messiah aw 
so closely connected, and so similar as regards prediction of birth 
retirement, ministry, and early end, yet, so far as we know, they 
come into actual contact only at one brief period, when thf 
Forerunner baptized the Christ. Once some of John's disciple* 
raised the question of fasting, and Jesus answered it (v. 33 ; Mt 
ix. 14), and once John sent some of his disciples to Jesus tG 
question Him as to His Messiahship (vii. 19-23; ML xi. 2-19); 
but there is no meeting between Christ and the Baptist Lk., 
having completed his brief account of the Forerunner and his 
work, begins his mam subject, viz. the Messiah and His work. 
This involves a return to the point at which the Forerunner met 
the Messiah, and performed on Him the rite which prepared Him 
for His work, by publicly uniting Him with the people whom He 
came to save, and proclaiming Him before them. 

21* IK T*J? pa-nrio'flTJwu ebrarra Toy taxoV. "After all the people 
had been baptized"; cum baptizatus esset omnis populus (Cod. 
Brix.) : not, "wMk they were bevig baptized"; cum baptizaretur 
(Cod. Am.). The latter would be a> r<3 with the/w. infin. 

Both constructions are very freq. in Lk. Contrast the aorists in ii. 27, 
ix. 36, xL 37, xiv. I, xix. 15, xxiv. 30, Acts xi. 15 with the presents in v. I, 
12, vni. 5, 42, ix. 18, 29, 33, 51, x. 35, 38, xi. i. 27, xvn. n, 14, xxiv. 4, 
15, 51; Acts viii. 6, xix. I. Lk. is also fond of the stronger form &ra?, 
which is rare in N.T. outside his writings. Readings are often confused, but 
drew is well attested v. 26, viii. 37, ix. 15, xix. 37, 48, xxiii. i ; Acts ii. 44, 
iv. 31, v 16, x. 8, xi. xo, xvi 3, 28, xxv. 24 ; and may be right in other 

That there were great multitudes present when John baptized 
the Christ is not stated ; nor is it probable. Had Lk. written & 
T$ /3a7rieo-0ai, this would have implied the presence of many other 
candidates for baptism; but it was not until "after every one of 
the people had been baptized" that the baptism of Jesus took 
place. Possibly Jesus waited until He could be alone with John. 
In any case, those who had long been waiting for their turn would 
go home soon after they had accomplished their purpose. It was 
some time before this that John said to the people, " He that cometh 
after me ... is standing in the midst of you, and ye know Him 
not* (Jn. L 26). They could hardly have been so ignorant of Him, 
if large multitudes had been present when John baptized Him. 

KCH 'Itjcroo paTrTi<r0W)s. It is remarkable that this, which seems 
to us to be the main fact, should be expressed thus incidentally by 
a participle. It is as if the baptism of all the people were regarded 
as carrying with it the baptism of Jesus almost as a necessary com- 


plement : "After they had been baptized, and when He had been 
baptized and was praying." But perhaps the purpose of Lk. is to 
narrate the baptism, not so much for its own sake as an instance of 
Christ's conformity to what was required of the people, as for the 
sake of the Divine recognition and authentication which Jesus then 

Jerome has preserved this fragment of the Gospel ace. to the Hebrews : " Lo, 
the mother of the Lord and His brethren said to Him, John the Baptist baptizeth 
for remission of sins : let us go and be baptized by him. But He said to them, 
Wherein have I sinned that I should go and be baptized by him? except perchance 
this very thing which I have said is ignorance" (Adv. Pelag. lii. i ). The Tractatus 
de Rebapttsmate says that the Pauli Pr&duatio represented " Christ, the only 
man who was altogether without fault, both making confession respecting His 
own sin, and driven almost against His will by His mother Mary to accept the 
baptism of John : also that when He was baptized fire was seen on the water, 
which is not written in any Gospel " (xvii. ; Hartel's Cyprian, ii. p. 90). The 
fire in the water is mentioned in Justin (Try. lxxxvui,)> but not as recorded by 
the Apostles ; and also in the Gospel ace. to the Hebrews. 

icoi -n-poo-euxojicVou. Lk. alone mentions this. On his Gospel 
as emphasizing the duty of prayer see Introd. 6. Mt and ML 
say that Jesus saw the Spirit descending ; Jn. says that the Baptist 
saw it ; Lk. that it took place (lyevfiro) along with the opening of 
the heaven and the coming of the voice. Mk. says simply TO 
Tn/efyux ; Mt. has irvev/Aa cov ; Lk. 710 HTCV/MI TO ayiov. See on 
I IS- 

The constr. of y&ero with ace. and infin. is on the analogy of the class, 
constr. of owl/by : it is freq. in Lk. See note, p. 45. The form dw^x- 
6rjvai is anomalous, as if assimilated to dpopxdcu : comp. Jn. k. IO, 14 ; 
Rev. iv. I, vi. i. 

22. crw/mriKw ciSei <&s ircpwrrcpcfo "In a bodily form" is 
peculiar to Lk. Nothing is gained by admitting something visible 
and rejecting the dove. Comp, the symbolical visions of Jehovah 
granted to Moses and other Prophets. We dare not assert that the 
Spirit cannot reveal Himself to human sight, or that in so doing 
He cannot employ the form of a dove or of tongues of fire. The 
tongues were appropriate when the Spirit was given "by measure* 
to many. The dove was appropriate when the Spirit was given 
in His fulness to one. It is not true that the dove was an ancient 
Jewish symbol for the Spirit In Jewish symbolism the dove is 
Israel. The descent of the Spirit was not, as some Gnostics 
taught, the moment of the Incarnation : it made no change in the 
nature of Christ But it may have illuminated Him so as to com- 
plete His growing consciousness of His relations to God and to 
man (ii. 52). It served two purposes : (i) to make Him known to 
the Baptist, who thenceforward had Divine authority for making 
Him known to the world (Jn. i. 32, 33); and (2) to mark the offi- 
cial beginning of the ministry, like the anointing of a king. As at 


the Transfiguration, Christ is miraculously glorified before settmg 
out to suffer, a voice from heaven bears witness to Him, and " the 
goodly fellowship of the Prophets " waits on His glory. 

The phrase tjxav^v ycv<rOai is freq. in Lk (i. 44, ix. 35, 36; Acts ii. 6, 
vii. 31, x. 13, xix. 34). Elsewhere only Mk. i. 1 1, ix. 7 j Jn. xu. 30 ; Rev. vui. 5. 
Comp. ipxerai <j>tor/i t Jn. xii. 28; elixereu 0w^, Rev. xvi. 17, xix. 5. 

2J. Responsto adpreces^ ver. 2 1 (Beng ). The 2v shows that the 
voice conveyed a message to the Christ as well as to the Baptist. 
Mk. also has 2u cT: in Mt lii. 17 we have OSros ecmi/. Diversitas 
locutionum adhuc etiam utilis est, ne uno modo dictum minus intelli- 
gatur (Aug.). In the narrative of the Transfiguration all three have 

The reference seems to be to Ps. ii. 7 ; and here D and other important 
witnesses have Tfo's pov el crti, cy& trfinepw yeytvpijicd re. Augustine says that 
this was the reading of some MSS., "although it is stated not to be found in the 
more ancient MSS." (De Cons. Evang. ii. 14: comp. EncJiir. ad Laurent, xlix.). 
Justin has it in his accounts of the Baptism (Try. Ixxxvin., cm.). In Mt. it is 
po&sible to take 6 ayairrrrds with what follows: "The beloved in whom I am 
well pleased" ; but this is impossible here and hi Mk. i. ii, and therefore im- 
probable in Mt. The repetition of the article presents the epithet as a separate 
fact. "Thou art My Son, My beloved one." Comp. [tovvos e&v ayair^s 
(Horn Oil, ii. 365). It is remarkable that St. John never uses aycnrijTos of 
Christ : neither in the Fourth Gospel nor in the Apocalypse does the woid occur 
in any connexion. 

vS<$ii<ra. ** I am well pleased ": the timeless aonst. Comp. Jn. xiii. 3. 
The verb is an exception to the rule that, except where a verb is compounded 
with a prep., the verbal termination is not retained, but one from a noun of the 
same root is substituted : e.g* adwareLVj etepyereiv, not aStiva<r$ai., evepydfccrQai. 
Comp. KapadoKew and dv<r&r/j<rKetv t which are similar exceptions, Win. xvi. 5, 
p. 125. 

The voice does not proclaim Jesus as the Messiah, as a legend would prob- 
ably have represented. No such proclamation was needed either by Jesus or 
by the Baptist. The descent of the Spirit had told John that Jesus was the 
Christ (Jn. i. 33). This voice from heaven, as afterwards at the Tiansfiguration 
(ix 35), and again shortly before the Passion (Jn. xii. 28), followed closely upon 
Christ's prayer, and may be regarded as the answer to it. His humanity was 
capable of needing the strength which the heavenly assurance gave. To call 
this voice from heaven the Bath-Kol of the Rabbis, or to treat it as wialogous 
to it, is misleading. The Rabbinic Bath-Kol, or " Daughter-voice," is regarded 
as an echo of the voice of God : and the Jews liked to believe that it had been 
granted to them after the gift of prophecy had ceased. The utterances attri- 
buted to it are in some cases so frivolous or profane, that the more intelligent 
Rabbis denounced it as a superstition. 

It has been pointed out that Lk appears to treat the baptism of Jesus by 
John as a matter of course. Mt. tells us that the Baptist at first protested 
against it ; and many writers have felt that it requires explanation. Setting 
aside the profane suggestions that Jesus was not sinless, and therefore needed 
"repentance baptism for remission of sins," or that He was in collusion with 
John, we may note four leading hypotheses. I. He wished to do honour to 
John. 2. He desired to elicit from John a declaration of His Messiahship. 
3. He thereby gave a solemn sign that He had done with home life, and was 
His public ministry. 4. He thereby consecrated Himself for Hi* 


work. This last seems to be nearest to the truth. The other three would be 
more probable if we were expiessly told that multitudes of spectators were 
present ; whereas the reverse seems to be implied. John's baptism was prepara- 
tory to the kingdom of the Messiah. For everyone else it was a baptism of 
repentance. The Messiah, who needed no repentance, could yet accept the 
pieparation. In each case it marked the beginning of a new life. It conse- 
crated the people for the reception of salvation. It consecrated the Christ for 
the bestowing of it (Neander, L.J. C 42 (5), Eng. tr. j>. 68) But besides 
this it was a "fulfilment of righteousness," a complying with the requirements 
of the Law. Although puie Himself, through His connexion with an unclean 
people He was Levitically unclean. " On the principles of O.T. righteousness 
His baptism was required" (Lange, L. of C, i. p. 355). 

In the Fathers and liturgies we find the thought that by being baptized Him- 
self Jesus elevated an external rite into a sacrament, and consecrated the element 
of water for perpetual use. Baptizatus est ergo Dominus rum mundari nolens^ 
sed mundare aqttas ( Ambr. on Lk m. 21, 23) "By the Baptisme of thy wel 
beloved sonne Jesus Chnste, thou dydest sanctifie the fludde Jordan, and al other 
waters to this misticall washing away of synne " (First Prayer-Book of Edw. VI. 
1549, Public Baptism) ; which follows the Gregorian address, " By the Baptism 
of Thine Only-begotten Son hast been pleased to sanctify the streams of water " 
(Bright, Anaent Collects, p^. 161). 

There is no contradiction between John's "Comest Thou to me?" (Mt 
111. 14) and " I knew Him not" (Jn, i. 31, 33). As a Prophet John recognized 
the smlessness of Jesus, just as Elisha recognized the avarice and untruthrumess 
of Gehaa, or the tieachery and cruelty of Hazael (2 Kings v. 26, viii. 10-12) ; 
but until the Spirit descended upon Him, he did not know that He was the 
Messiah (Weiss, Lebenjesu, I. u. 9, Eng. tr. i. p. 320). John had three main 
functions : to predict the coming of the Messiah ; to prepare the people for it ; 
and to point out the Messiah when He came. When these were accomplished, 
his work was nearly complete. 

533-38. The Genealogy of Jesus Christ. Comp. Mt L 1-17. 
The literature is very abundant : the following are among the prin- 
cipal authorities, from which a selection may be made, and the 
names of other authorities obtained. 

Lord A. Hervey, The Genealogies of our Lord and Saviour^ 
Macmillan, 1853; J. B. McClellan, The New Testament of our 
Lord and Saviour, i. pp. 408-422, Macmillan, 1875; W. H. Mill, 
Observations on the Application of Pantheistic Principles to the 
Theory and Historic Criticism of the Gospel^ pp. 147-218; D.B? 
art. "Genealogy"; Z>. of Chr. Biog. art " Africanus " ; Schaffs 
Herzog, art "Genealogy"; Commentaries of Mansel (Speaker), 
Meyer, Schaff, on Mt L; of Farrar, Godet, M. R. Riddle, on 
Lk. iii. 

Why does Lk. insert the genealogy here instead of at the beginning of his 
Gospel ? It would be only a slight exaggeration to say that this is the beginning 
of his Gospel, for the first three chapters are only introductory. The use of 
ApXOfJtepos here implies that the Evangelist is now making a fresh start. ^ Two of 
the three introductory chapters are the history of the Forerunner, which Lk. 
completes in the third chapter before beginning his account of the work of the 
Messiah. Not until Jesus has been anointed by the Spirit does the history of 
the Messiah, i.e. the Anointed One, begin 5 and His genealogy then becomes of 
importance. In a similar way the pedigree of Moses is placed, not just before 


or just after the account of his birth (Exod. ii. I, 2), where not even the names 
of his parents are given, but just after his public appearance before Pharaoh as 
the spokesman of Jehovah and the leader of Israel (Exod. VL 14-27). 

The statement of Julius Afhcamis, that Herod the Great caused the genealo- 
gies of ancient Jewish families to be destroyed, in order to conceal the defects 
of his own pedigree {Eus. F. E. I 7. 13), is of no moment If he ever gave 
such an order, it would of necessity be very imperfectly executed. Tke rebuild- 
ing of jhe temple would give him the opportunity of burning the genealogies of 
the priests, which were preserved in the temple archives, but pedigrees in the 
possession of private families would be carefully concealed. Josephus was able 
to give his own genealogy, as he "found it described in the public records" h 
raw fyfjuxrlats S&rois faayeypapfdirriv ( Vita, i) ; and he tells us what great care 
was taken to preserve the pedigrees of the priests, not merely in Judaea, but in 
Egypt, and Babylon, ana ** whithersoever our priests are scattered" (Apion 
i. 7), It is therefore an empty objection to say that Lk. could not have 
obtained this genealogy from any authentic source, for all such sources had been 
destroyed by Herod. It is clear from Josephus that, if Herod made the attempt, 
he did not succeed in destroying even all public records. Jews are very tena- 
cious of their genealogies , and a decree to destroy such things would be evaded 
in every possible way. The importance of the evidence of Afhcanus lies in his 
claim to have obtained information from members of the family, who gloried in 
preserving the memory of their noble extraction ; and in his referring both 
pedigrees as a matter of course to Joseph. It is not probable that Joseph was the 
only surviving descendant of David \vho was known to be such But it is likely 
enough that all such persons were in humble positions, like Joseph himself, and 
thus escaped the notice and jealousy of Herod. Throughout his reign he took 
no precaution against David ic claimants ; and had he been told that a village 
carpenter was the representative of David's house, he would possibly have 
treated him as Domitian is said to have treated tie grandsons of Judas the 
brother of the Lord with supercilious indifference (Eus. H. E. in. 20). 

23. afircSs, "He Himself," to whom these miraculous signs 
had reference: comp. L 22; Mt Mi. 4. The AV. translation of 
the whole clause, ar6s TJK 'ITJO-OUS dpxoficyos c&oVi ITWK rpidKovra, 
"Jesus Himself began to be about thirty years of age," is im- 
possible. It is probably due to the influence of Beza : incipiebat 
esse quasi annorum triginta. But Cranmer led the way in this 
error in the Bible of 1539, and the later versions followed : Purvey 
is vague, like the Vulgate : " was bigynnynge as of thritti year," 
erat incifiens quasi annorum trigtnta. Tyndale is right: "was 
about thirty yere of age when He beganne"; i.e. when He began 
His ministry m the solemn way just recorded. Comp. the use of 
d/>a/xi/os in Acts L 22. In both cases SiSacr/cciv may be under- 
stood, but is not necessary. In Mk. iv. i we have the full expres- 
sion, ^p|aro Sffiao-ieeii', which is represented in the parallel, Mt 
xiii. i, by cfca^To. Professor Marshall has shown that ^pfaro and 
eKaOrjra may be equivalents for one and the same Aramaic verb 
(Expositor , April 1891) : see on v. 21. 

It is obvious that this verse renders little help to chronology. 
"About thirty" may be anything from twenty-eight to thirty-two, 
to give no wider margin. It is certain that our era is at least four 
years too late, for it besrins with A.U.C. 754. Herod the Gteat 


died just before the Passover A.U.C. 750, which is therefore the 
latest year possible for the Nativity. If we reckon the " fifteenth 
year" of ver. i from the death of Augustus, Jesus was probably 
thirty-two at the time of His Baptism. 

&v utos, <&s lyojuj^To, 9 lwoTq<f> TOU 'HXcu This is the right punctua- 
tion : " being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph the son of 
Heli. M It is altogether unnatural to place the comma after 'Imtn^ 
and not before it : " being the son (as was supposed of Joseph) of 
Heli " \ ie. being supposed to be the son of Joseph, but being 
really the grandson of Heli. It is not credible that wos can mean 
both son and grandson in the same sentence. J. Lightfoot pro- 
posed that "Jesus" (viz. mo?, not vlov) should be understood 
throughout ; " Jesus (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, and so 
the son of Heli, and so the son of Matthat," etc. (Hor. Heb. on 
f Jc. iiL 23). But this is not probable : see on TOV )eov (ver. 38). 

It is evident from the wording that Lk. is here giving the genealogy of Joseph 
and not of Mary. It would have been quite out of harmony with either Jewish 
ideas or Gentile ideas to derive the birthright of Jesus from His mother. In the 
eye of the law Jesus was the heir of Joseph j and therefore it is Joseph's descent 
which is of importance. Mary may have been the daughter of Heli ; but, if 
she was, Lk. ignores the fact. The difference between the two genealogies was 
from very early times felt to be a difficulty, as is seen from the letter of Julius 
Africanus to Aristides, c* A.D. 220 (Eus. M. . i. 7 ; Routh, ReL Sacr. 11. 
p. 228) ; and it is probable that so obvious a solution, as that one was the pedi- 
gree of Joseph and the other the pedigree of Mary, would have been very soon 
advocated, if there hqd been any reason (excepting the difficulty) for adopting 
it. But this solution is not suggested by anyone until Annius of Viterbo pro- 
pounded it, c. A.D. 1490. 

The imam facts of the two genealogies are these. From Adam to Abraham 
Lk. is alone. From Abraham to David, Lk. and Mt. agree. From David to 
Joseph they differ, excepting in the names of Zorobabel and his father SalatbieL 
The various attempts which have been made at reconciling the divergences, 
although in no case convincingly successful, are yet sufficient to show that recon- 
ciliation is not impossible. If we were in possession of all the facts, we might 
find that both pedigrees are in accordance with them. Neither of them presents 
difficulties which no addition to our knowledge could solve. In addition to the 
authorities named above, the monographs of Hottinger, Surenhusius, and Voss 
may be consulted. 

S7. TOU ZopopdpeX TOU 2o\a0ufj\. It is highly improbable that 
these are different persons from the Zerubbabel and the Shealtiei 
of Mt L 12. That at the same period of Jewish history there 
should be two fathers bearing the rare name Salathiel or Shealtiei, 
each with a son bearing the rare name Zerubbabel, and that both 
of these unusually-named fathers should come in different ways 
into the genealogy of the Messiah, is scarcely credible, although 
this hypothesis has been adopted by both Hottinger and Voss. 
Zerubbabel (= "Dispersed in Babylon," or "Begotten in Baby- 
lon ") was head of the tribe of Judah at die time of the return from 
the Babylonish Captivity in the first year of Cyrus ; and he was 


therefore an obvious person to include in the pedigrte of the 
Messiah. Hence he was called the Rhesa or Prince of the Cap- 
tivity. In i Chron. iii. 19 he is given as the son of Pedaiah and 
nephew of Shealtiel : and this is probably correct But he became 
the heir of Shealtiel because the latter had no sons. In Mt. i. 12 
and i Chron. Hi. 17, Shealtiel is the son of Jechoniah, king of 
Judah; whereas Lk. makes him the son of Neri. Jeconiah is 
called Coniah, Jer. xxiL 24, and Jehoiachin, Iii. 31 ; 2 Kings xxiv. 6; 
a Chron. xxxvl 8, 9 ; and all three names mean " The Lord will 
establish." From Jer. xxii. 30 we learn that he had no children ; 
and therefore the line of David through Solomon became extinct in 
him. The three pedigrees indicate that an heir for the childless 
Jeconiah was found in Shealtiel the son of Neri, who was of the 
house of David through Nathan. Thus the junction of the two 
lines of descent in Shealtiel * and Zerubbabel is fully explain*d. 
Shealtiel was the son of Neri of Nathan's line, and also the heir of 
Jeconiah of Solomon's line ; and having no sons himself, he had 
his nephew Zerubbabel as adopted son and heir. Rhesa, who 
appears in Lk., but neither in Mt nor in i Chron., is probably not 
a name at all, but a title, which some Jewish copyist mistook for a 
name. "Zerubbabel Rhesa," or "Zerubbabel the Prince," has 
been made into "Zerubbabel (begat) Rhesa," This correction 
brings Lk. into harmony with both Mt and i Chron. For (i) the 
Greek 'Icoai/as represents the Hebrew Hanamah (i Chron. in. 19), 
a generation which is omitted by Mt. ; and (2^ LL's TovSa is the 
bame as Mt's 'A^tov'S (Jud-a = Ab-jud). Again, 'JWSa or 'A^ww'8 
may be identified with Hodaviah (i Chron. iii. 24) ; for this name 
is interchanged with Judah, as is seen by a comparison of Ezra 
iiL 9 and Neh. xi. 9 with Ezra ii. 40 and i Chron. ix. 7. 

36. IaX8t TOU Kcuyfyi TOO 'Ap4>ad8. In LXX this Cainan appears 
as the son of Sala or Shelah, and father of Arphaxad, in the genea- 
logy of Shem (Gen. x. 24, xi. 12; i Chron. i. 18). But the name 
is not found in any Hebrew MS., or in any other version made from 
the Hebrew. In LXX it may be an insertion, for no one earlier 
than Augustine mentions the name. D omits it here, while K B L 
have the form Kaira^ for Kati/av. But the hypothesis that inter- 
polation here has led to interpolation in LXX cannot be maintained 
upon critical principles. 

38. *AS(|i. That Lk. should take the genealogy beyond David 
and Abraham to the fathei of the whole human race, is entirely in 
harmony with the Pauline universality of his Gospel. To the Jew 
it was all-important to know that the Messiah was of the stock of 
Abraham and of the house of David. Mt therefore places this fact 

1 Both forms of the name, Shealtiel and Salathiel, are found in Haggai and 
elsewhere in (XT.; but in the Apocrypha and N,T. the form used is Salathiel 
("I have asked God"). 


in the forefront of his Gospel. Lk., writing to all alike, shows that 
the Messiah is akin to the Gentile as well as to the Jew, and that 
all mankind can claim Him as a brother. 1 

But why does Lk. add that Adam was the son of God? Cer- 
tainly not in order to show the Divine Sonship of the Messiah, 
which would place Him in this respect on a level with all mankind. 
More probably it is added for the sake of Gentile readers, to remind 
them of the Divine origin of the human race, an origin which they 
share with the Messiah. It is a correction of the myths respecting 
the origin of man, which were current among the heathen. Scrip- 
tura, etiam quod ad humani generis ortum pertinet, figit satiatque 
eognitionem nostram ; earn qui spernunt aut ignorant, pendent errant- 
que inter tempora antemundana et postmundana (Beng.). It is very 
forced and unnatural to take TOV cov as the gen. of 6 eos, and 
make this gen. depend upon &v vti<s at the beginning of the gene- 
alogy, as if Jesus and not Adam was styled the " son of God." Thus 
the whole pedigree from o>s evo/u'ero to *ASa/i would be a gigantic 
parenthesis between &v vwfe and TOV cov. The rov throughout 
belongs to the word in front of it, as is clear from the fact that 
'loxny^, the first name, has no rot) before it Each TOW means "who 
was of," i.e. either " the son of" or " the heir of." Both AV. and 
RV. give the sense correctly. 

IV. 1-13. The Internal Preparation for the Ministry of the 
Christ: the Temptation in the Wilderness, Mt iv. i-n; Mk. 
L 12, 13. 

R. C. Trench, Studies in the Gospels, pp. 1-65, Macmillan, 
1867; B. Weiss, Leben fesu, L ii 10, Berlin, 1882; Eng. tr. i. 
pp. 319-354; H. Lathain, Pastor Pastorum, pp. 112-146, Bell, 
1890; P. ScharT, Person of Christ, pp. 32, 153, Nisbet, 1880; A, 
M. Fairbairn, Expositor, first series, voL ill pp. 321-342, Hodder, 
1876; P. Didon,yr&tf Christ, ch. iii pp. 208-226, Plon, 1891, 

Many futile and irreverent questions have been raised respect- 
ing this mysterious subject; futile, because it is impossible to 
answer them, excepting by empty conjectures; and irreverent, 
because they are prompted by curiosity rather than by a desire for 
illumination. Had the answers to them been necessary for our 
spiritual welfare, the answers would have been placed within our 
reach. Among such questions axe such as these: Did Satan 

1 " In the one case we see a royal Infant born by a regal title to a glorious 
inheritance ; and in the other a ministering Saviour who bears the natural sum 
of human sorrow " (Wsctt. Int. to the Gosptk, 7th ed. p. 3x6). The whole 
passage should be read. 


assume a human form, and change his form with each change of 
temptation, or did he remain invisible? Did he know who Jesus 
was, or was he trying to discover this ? Did he know, until he was 
named, that Jesus knew who he was ? Where was the spot from 
which he showed all the kingdoms of the world ? 

Three points are insisted upon in the Epistle to the Hebrews 
(ii 18, iv. 15), and beyond them we need not go, i. The tempta- 
tions were real 2. Jesus remained absolutely unstained by them. 
3. One purpose of the temptations was to assure us of His sym- 
pathy when we are tempted The second point limits the first and 
intensifies the third. The sinlessness of Jesus excluded all those 
temptations which spring from previous sin j for there was no taint 
in Him to become the source of temptation. But the fact that the 
solicitations came wholly from without, and were not born from 
within, does not prevent that which was offered to Him being 
regarded as desirable. The force of a temptation depends, not 
upon the sin involved in what is proposed, but upon the advantage 
connected with it. And a righteous man, whose will never falters 
for a moment, may feel the attractiveness of the advantage more 
keenly than the weak man who succumbs ; for the latter probably 
gave way before he recognized the whole of the attractiveness ; or 
his nature may be less capable of such recognition. In this way 
the sinlessness of Jesus augments His capacity for sympathy : for 
in every case He felt the/&/7 force of temptation. 1 

It is obvious that the substance of the narrative could have 
had only one source. No one has succeeded in suggesting any 
probable alternative. There is no Old Testament parallel, of which 
this could be an adaptation. Nor is there any prophecy that the 
Messiah would have to endure temptation, of which this might be 
a fictitious fulfilment And we may be sure that, if the whole 
had been baseless invention, the temptations would have been of 
a more commonplace, and probably of a grosser kind. No Jewish 
or Christian legend is at all like this. It is from Christ Himself 
that the narrative comes ; and He probably gave it to the disciples 
in much the same form as that in which we have it here. 

1 " Sympathy with the sinner in his trial does not depend on the experience 
of sin, but on the experience of the strength of the temptation to sin, which only 
the sinless can know in its full intensity. He who falls yields before the last 
train " (Wsctt. on Heb. ii. 18). See Neander, L. /. C, 46, 47, pp. 77, 78. 


1. TrXi'jpTjs ir^ufiaTos dyiou. These words connect the Tempta- 
tion closely with the Baptism. 1 It was under the influence of 
the Spirit, which had just descended upon Him, that He went, in 
obedience to God's will, into the wilderness. All three accounts 
mark this connexion ; and it explains the meaning of the narrative. 
Jesus had been endowed with supernatural power; and He was 
tempted to make use of it in furthering His own interests without 
regard to the Father's will. And here ay^x^fj irapacrft}wu 
(Mt. iv. i) must not be understood as meaning that Christ went 
into the wilderness to court temptation. That would be too like 
yielding to the temptation which He resisted (w. 9-12). He 
went into the desert in obedience to the Spirit's promptings. That 
He should be tempted there was the Divine purpose respecting 
Him, to prepare Him for His work. 

Neither Mt. nor Mk. has ayiov as an epithet of rwfyta here (see on L 15) ; 
and neither of them has Lk.*s favourite 1nr4<rTpciffci'. 

TJYTO iv T<3 wcJjutcm Iv TJJ piqfi>. " He was led in (not into) 
the wilderness," f.e. in His wanderings there, as in His progress 
thither, He was under Divine influence and guidance. The imperf. 
indicates continued action. Tradition, which is not likely to be of 
any value, places this wilderness close to Jericho. Some region 
farther north is more probable. The ifjfUpas Tcoxrepcfcorra may be 
taken either with ^yero (RV.) or with Tmpa^ojLWj'os (AV.), As the 
temptation by Satan was simultaneous (pres. part) with the lead- 
ing by the Spirit, the sense will be the same, whichever arrange- 
ment be adopted. In Mk. also the words are amphibolous, and 
may be taken either with yjv kv rrj epyp.<j> or with 7reipao/ivos. If 
we had only the account in Mt. we might have supposed that the 
temptations did not begin until the close of the forty days. The 
three recorded may have come at the end of the time, as seems to be 
implied with regard to the first of them. Or they may be given as 
representative of the struggles which continued throughout the 
whole period. 

2. iripa6jii>os. The word is here used in its commonest 
sense of " try or test," with a sinister motive. In N.T. it has three 
uses: i. "try or attempt" to do (Acts ix. 26, rvi 7, xxiv. 6); 2. 
" try or test" with a good motive (Jru vi 6 ; 2 Cor. xiii 5 ; Rev. 
ii. 2), especially of God's sending trials (i Cor. x. 13 ; Heb. XL 17 ; 

1 Le bapt&me et la tentation se succedent Fun & ? outre dans fa rlahtt dc 
fhistoirC) comme dans le recit des Evangthstes. Ces deux faits inseparables^ 
qui fblairent en fopposant dans un contrast* vigoreux, sont te vrat. prelude 
de la vie du Christ. Vun est la manifestation de I } Esprit de Dieu^ Faittrc, 
telle de F esprit du mat; Fun nous montre la filiation divine de Jesus* Fautre, 
sa nature humaine voute a la lutte et a Ftpreuve; Fun nous revele la force infinU 
atoec laquelle U agira, Fautre^ F obstacle qu'il saura renverser ; Fun ftpus 
mstigne sa intime* F outre* UL hi de son action (Didon, p. 22$). 


Rev. iii. 10) ; 3. "try or test? with a bad motive, in order to pro- 
duce perplexity or failure (xi. 16; Mt xix. 3 ; Jn. viii. 6), especially 
of tempting to sin (i Cor. vii. 5 ; i Thes. iii. 5 ; Jas. i. 13). It is 
thus of much wider meaning than So/a/io&ii/ (xii. 56, xiv. 19), 
which has only the second of these meanings. Trench, Syn. 
Ixxiv. ; Cremer, Lex, p. 494. 

fa& TOO BiapoXou. All three use VTTO of the agency of Satan. 
He is not a mere instrument Comp. 2 Cor. ii. 1 1 ; Acts x. 38. 
In N.T. 8i/?oXos with the art. always means Satan, " the calumni- 
ator," /car e&x^V. In Mt., Jn., Acts, Eph., i and 2 Tim., Heb., 
James, Jude, i Pet, and Rev. this use is invariable. It is possible 
that 6 Sia/?oAo5 was originally a translation of Satan = " the ad- 
versary." In LXX ei/8ta/?eXA.iv sometimes means " meet, oppose " 
(Num. xxii. 22, 32), and 8ta/?oXo? means "adversary" (r Mac i. 
36). In Job (i. 6-12, ii. 1-7) and Zech. (iii. 1-3) 6 Sia/SoXo? is 
used as in N.T. for Satan, as the accuser or slanderer of God to 
man and of man to God. In this scene he endeavours to mis- 
represent God, and to induce Jesus to adopt a false view of His 
relation to God 

The existence of such a being is sometimes denied, but on 
purely a priori grounds. To science the question is an open one, 
and does not admit of demonstration either way. But the teach- 
ing of Christ and His Apostles is clear and explicit, and only 
three explanations are possible. Either (i) they accommodated 
their language to a gross superstition, knowing it to be such ; or 

(2) they shared this superstition, not knowing it to be such ; or 

(3) the doctrine is not a superstition, but they taught the actual 
truth. As Keim rightly says, one cannot possibly regard all the 
sayings of Jesus on this subject as later interpolations, and "Jesus 
plainly designated His contention with the empire of Satan as a 
personal one" (Jes. of Naz.> Eng. tr. ii. pp. 318, 325). See Gore, 
Dissertations on Subjects connected with the Incarnation, pp. 23-27. 

OUK !4>ayv oSSci/. This does agree well with the supposition 
that Jesus partook of the scanty food which might be found in the 
wilderness. The viycrrevcras of Mt seems to imply the deliberate 
fasting which was customary in times of solemn retirement for 
purposes of devotion. But this does not exclude the possibility 
that the mental and spiritual strain was so great that for a time 
there was no craving for food. In any case the want of food 
would at last bring prostration of body and mind ; and: then the 
violence of temptation would be specially felt Both Mt. and Lk. 
appear to mean that it was not until near the end of the forty days 
that the pangs of hunger were endured. For o-unreXeto-Oai of days 
being completed comp. Acts xxi. 27 ; Job i. 5 ; Tobit x. 7. 1 

1 The fasts of Moses and Elijah were of similar duration (Deut. ix. 9 ; i K. 
XUL 8) The number forty in Scripture is connected with suffering. Th 


3. enrey. Mt. adds irpocreXOw, which is a very favourite ex- 
pression of his. It does not necessarily imply corporal presence, 
although Mt. himself may have understood it in that sense, Jesus 
says of the approaching struggle in Gethsemane, " The prince of the 
world cometh " (Jn. xiv. 30). Nowhere in Scripture is Satan said 
to have appeared in a visible form : Zech. iii. i is a vision. And 
nothing in this narrative requires us to believe that Satan was 
visible on this occasion. 

Ei utds * TOU 0eou. Both Mt and Lk. have vto's r. . without 
the article, the reference being to the relationship to God, rather 
than to the office of the Messiah. The emphatic word is wos. 
The allusion to the voice from heaven (id. 22) is manifest, but is 
not Likely to have occurred to a writer of fiction, who would more 
probably have written, "If Thou art the Christ? The "if" does 
not necessarily imply any doubt in Satan, although Augustine takes 
it so j 1 but it is perhaps meant to inspire doubt in Jesus : "Hath 
God said, Thou art My beloved Son, and yet forbidden Thee to 
give Thyself bread?" Comp. "Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not 
eat of any tree of the garden?" (Gen. iii i). The suggestion 
seems to be that He is to work a miracle in order to prove the 
truth of Gos express declaration, and that He may doubt His 
relation to God, if God does not allow the miracle. 

This seems better than to regard the first temptation as a temptation of the 
flesh. If the food had been there, would it have been siniul for Jesus to partake 
of it ? Again, it is sometimes said that it was a temptation to use His supernatural 
power to supply His own necessities. Among " the Laws of the Working of 
Signs" we are told was one to the effect that "Our Lord will not use His 
special powers to provide for His personal wants or those of His immediate 
followers." 2 This law perhaps does not hold, except so far as it coincides 
with the principle that no miracle is wrought where the given end can be ob- 
tained without miiacle. Some of Christ's escapes from His enemies seem to 
have been miraculous. Was not that "providing for a personal want"? His 
rejoining His disciples by walking on the sea might be classed under the same 
head. The boat coming suddenly to land might be called "providing for the 
wants of His immediate followers. Had He habitually supplied His personal 
wants by miracle, then He would have ceased to share the lot of mankind. 
But it would be rash to say that it would have been sinful for Hun to supply 
Himself with food miraculously, when food was necessary for His work and 
could not be obtained by ordinary means. It is safer to regard this as a. 
temptation to satisfy Himself of the truth of God's word by a test of His own, 

Deluge lasted forty days and nights (Gen. vii. 4, 12), The Israelites wandered 
for forty years (Num. MV. 33, xxxiL 13). Egypt is to lie waste forrv years 
(Ezek. xxix. n). Ezekiel is to bear the iniquity of the house of Judah (>.*. the 
penalty for that iniquity) forty days, each day representing a year (iv. 6). 
Offenders received forty stnpes as a maximum (Deut xxv. 3). A mother was 
unclean for forty days after childbirth (Lev. si. 1-4). Perhaps we are to 
understand that the fast of the Ninevites lasted forty days. 

1 Dubitavit de Ulo d&monum princess, eumque tentavit, an Christus estd 
txpkrans (De Civ. Dei, ix. 21 ). 

1 Latham, Pastor Pastorum, p. 113. 


The singular r$ \t$y retry is more graphic tl an the ol \LBoi o5rot of Mt. A 
single loaf is all that He need produce. The similarity between lumps of stone 
and loaves of bread perhaps explains why this material, so common in the 
wilderness, was selected for changt into food. 

For the use of fra after tlrt (x. 40, xix. 15, etc.) see Win. xhv. 8, pp. 
420-424; B. Weiss on Mt. iv. 3; Simcox, Lang, of N.T. p. 177; Green, 
Gr. ofN. 7*. p* 170. It is a weakening of die telic force of Ivo, rather than m 
mere substitute for the infinitive. 

4L Christ does not reply to the "if " by affirming that He is 
the Son of God ; nor does He explain why the Son of God does 
not accept the devil's challenge. He gives an answer which holds 
good for any child of God in similar temptation. 1 The reply is a 
pointed refutation, however, of the special suggestion to Himself, 
6 av0/x>iros having direct reference to wos r. o. Satan suggests 
that God's Son would surely be allowed to provide food for Him- 
self. Jesus replies that God can sustain, not only His Son, but 
any human being, with or without food, and can make other things 
besides bread to be food Comp. " My meat is to do the will of 
Him that sent Me" (Jn. iv. 34). The reply is verbatim as LXX 
of Deut viii 3. As all His replies come from this book, we may 
conjecture that Jesus had recently been reading it or meditating 
on it The repeated use of a book which is so full of the trials of 
Israel in the wilderness may suggest a parallel between the forty 
days and the forty years. The direct reference is to the manna. 

The addition of the remainder of the quotation in A D and other authorities 
comes from Mt It differs in wording in the texts which insert it If it were 
genuine here, its absence from the best authorities would be most extra- 
ordinary. The insertion of 6 8idflo\os and of els 6pos tyy\6v m ver* 5, and 
die substitution of rov mfoytov for rijt QlKovfjt&rjs, are corruptions of the same 

5. Lk. places second the temptation which Mt places last 
The reasons given for preferring one order to the other axe sub- 
jective and unconvincing. Perhaps neither Evangelist professes to 
give any chronological order. Temptations may be intermingled. 
It is very doubtful whether the rorc with which Mt introduces the 
temptation which he places second, and the traXw with which he 
introduces his third, are intended to specify sequence in time. 
Many Lat MSS. (Gbcflqr) here place w. 5-8 after VD. 9-11. 
Lk. omits the command to Satan to depart; 2 and we have no 
means of knowing which temptation it immediately followed. Mt 
naturally connects it with the one which he places last 

See on ii. 22. The word does not require us to 

1 Trench quotes from Ambrose : Non enim quasi Deus utztur protestaU 
(qmdemm miUprodfrat\ serf quasi homo commune silt arcesstt auxthum. 

3 It is worth noting that AV., which follows those texts that insert "OCVaTt 
farkrov fJLov f Zapara in ver. 8, renders the words " Get thee behind Me, Satan M 
there, and "Get thee hence, Satan" in Mt 


believe that Satan had control of Christ's person and transferred 
Him bodily from the desert to a mountain-top. From no mountain 
could "all the kingdoms of the world" be visible, least of all "in 
a moment of time." If Satan on the mountain could present to 
Christ's mind kingdoms which were not visible to the eye, he 
could do so in the desert. We may suppose that he transferred 
Jesus in thought to a mountain-top, whence He could in thought 
see all For "all the kingdoms of the world" comp. Ezra L 2, 
where we have rfc y?s for " of the world " : in Mt. rov Kooywv, 
which D substitutes here. 

rijs oiKouji&Trjs. A favourite expression with Lk. (ii. i, xxL 26 ; 
Acts xi. 28, xvii. 6, 31, xix.-2y, xxiv. 5) : elsewhere only six times, 
of which one is a quotation (Rom. x. 18 from Ps. xix. 5). It 
describes the world as a place of settled government^ "the civilized 
world." To a Greek it might mean the Greek world as distinct 
from barbarian regions (Hdt. iv. no. 4; comp. Dem. De Cor, 
p. 442). Later it meant " the Roman Empire," orbis terrarum^ as 
in ii. i (Philo, Leg. ad Cat. 25). In inscriptions the Roman 
Emperor is 6 icvptos -rijs otKov/tcn;?. Finally, it meant "the whole 
inhabited earth," as here and xxi. 26 (Rev. xvL 14; Heb. L 6; 
Jos. Ant. vui. 13. 4 : JS.J. vii. 3. 3). In Heb. ii. 5 it is used of 
the world to come as an ordered system : see Wsctt LL omits 
icat TT}v S6av avr&v here, but adds it in Satan's offer. 

iv oTLyfifj XP KOU - Puncto temporisi comp. cv 17173 S<0o\/jun; 
(i Cor. xv. 52). Not in Mt Comp. Is. xxix. 5; 2 Mac ix.ii. 
It intimates that the kingdoms were represented, not in a series of 
pageants, but simultaneously : acuta tentatio (Beng.). To take Iv 
. with dvoyaycov is not a probable arrangement With 
T? (<rrtjtv="to prick") comp. stimulus^ "stick," and "sting." 

6. 2ol SoSo-oi . . . OTI ipol irapoS^Borau Both pronouns are 
emphatic : "To Thee I will give . . because to me it hath been 

The avrur after r^r &dr Is ft construetio ad smsum, referring to the 
kingdoms understood in r^v towrlay ratiniy, " this authority and jurisdiction." 
In ?rapa,$48<yr<u we have the common use of the perf. to espress permanent 
and present result of past action ; "it has been given overhand remains in 
my possession : comp. y^yparrau (4, 8, 10) and etp-qrat (12). 

Satan does not say by whom it has been given over ; and two answers are 
possible : i. by God's permission ; 2. by man's sin. But the latter does not 
exclude the former ; and in any case confitetur tentator^ se non esse conditorcm 
(Beng.)* That it refers to a Divine gift previous to his revolt against God, is a 
gratuitous conjecture. Christ Himself speaks of Satan as " the ruler of this 
world" (Jn. xu. 31, xiv. 30, xvi. ii). In the Rabbinical writings "Lord of 
this world" is a common name for Satan, as ruler of the heathen, in opposition 
to God, the Head of the Jewish theocracy. The devil is the ruler of the un- 
believing and sinful ; but he mixes truth with falsehood when he claims to have 
over all the material glory of the world. Comp. Eph. ii. 2 % 2 Cor, 


iv. 4 ; Rev. xiiL 2. In $ &r &&& the mixture of falsehood seems to be still 
greater. Even of those who are under the dominion of Satan it is only in a 
limited sense true that he can dispose of them as he pleases. But the subtlety 
of the temptation lies partly in the fact that it appeals to what is in a very real 
sense true. Satan intimates that the enormous influence which he possesses 
over human affairs may be obtained for the piomotion of the Messiah's King- 
dom. Thus all the pain and suffering, which otherwise lay before the Saviour 
of the world, might be evaded. 1 

7* l&v TrpoorKomqcrfls. Mt adds irecrwv, which, like irpooreXOoiv, 
indicates that he may have believed that Satan was visible, 
although this is not certain. Even actual prostration is possible 
to an invisible being, and " fall down and worship " is a natural 
figure for entire submission or intense admiration. In the East, 
prostration is an acknowledgment of authority -, not necessarily of 
personal merit. The temptation, therefore, seems to be that of 
admitting Satarfs authority and accepting promotion from him. 

Ivwmov IpoG. Lk.'s iavourite expression (i. 15, 17, 19, 75, etc.). The 
usual constr. after vpoffKweiv is the ace. (ver. 8 ; Mt. iv. 10 ; Rev. ix. 20, 
xiii, 12, xiv. 9, n) or the daL (Acts vii. 43 j Jn. iv. 21, 23 ; Rev. iv, 10, 
viL II) : but Rev. xv. 4 as here. 

carat <roG iracra. "The egovcria which has been delivered to 
me I am willing to delegate or transfer " : magna superbia (Beng.). 
The acceptance of it would be equivalent to Trpoa-Kvvyo-is. Just as 
in the first case the lawful desire for food was made an occasion of 
temptation, so here the lawful desire of power, a desire specially 
kwful in the Messiah. Everything depends upon why and how 
the food and the power are obtained. Christ was born to be a 
king ; but His Kingdom is not of this world (Jn. xviii. 36, 37), and 
the prince of this world has nothing in Him (Jn. riv. 30). He 
rejects the Jewish idea of the Messiah as an earthly potentate, and 
thus condemns Himself to rejection by His own people. He 
rejects Satan as an ally, and thereby has him as an implacable 
enemy. The end does not sanctify the means. 

8. irpoo-Kuwrjoreis. Mt. also has this word in harmony with 
Satan's ir/oooTcvwfo?* ; but in LXX of Deut. vi. 13 we have <o- 

see on vii. 27. XarpeuVeis. Lit. "serve for hire" 
" hireling"). In class. Grk. it is used of the service of 
slaves and of freemen, whether rendered to men or to God : in 
N.T. always of religious service, but sometimes of the worship of 
idols (Acts vii. 42 ; Rom. i. 25). Trench, Syn. xxxv, Propositum 
erat Domino humilitate diabolum vincere, nonpotentia (Jerome). 

9. TO irrcpuyioc TOU UpoG. It is impossible to determine what 

1 In this connexion a remark of Pere Didon is worth quoting. Of the 
traditional scene of the Temptation he says that there Christ avait sous lesytux 
ce chemin de Jtricko & Jlrusalem qtfildffvait suwr^ un jour^ 
pour aller & fa mort (J/sus Christ, ch. iii. p. 209). 


this means. The article points to its being something well known 
by this name. The three points conjectured are : i. the top of 
the Royal Porch, whence one looked into an abyss (Jos. Ant. 
xv. ii. 5); 2. the top of Solomon's Porch; 3. the roof of the 
^aos. It was from TO Trrepvyiov rov icpov that James the Just was 
thrown, according to Hegesippus (Eus. H. E. ii. 23. ii, 16). Had 
any part of the 1/009 been intended, we should perhaps have had 
T. vaov rather than r. iepov. 

El ul6s ct TOO eou. The repetition of this preamble is evidence 
that this temptation is in part the same as the first (ver. 3). In 
both cases Jesus is to "tempt" (ver. 12) God, to challenge Him 
to prove His Fatherhood by a test of His Son's own choosing. 
But, whereas in the first case Christ was to be rescued from an 
existing danger by a miracle, here He is to court needless danger 
in order to be rescued by a miracle. It may be that this is also a 
partial repetition of the second temptation. If the suggestion is 
that He should throw Himself down into the courts of the temple, 
so that the priests and the people might see His miraculous 
descent, and be convinced of His Messiahship, then this is once 
more a temptation to take a short cut to success, and, by doing 
violence to men's wills, avoid all the pain and suffering involved 
in the work of redemption. 1 If this is correct, then this tempta- 
tion is a combination of the other two. It is difficult to see what 
point there is in mentioning the temple, if presumptuously seeking 
peril was the only element in the temptation. The precipices of 
the wilderness would have served for that The prfXc o-cauTov 
expresses more definitely than the mid. would have done that the 
act is to be entirely His own. Not "Fall," nor "Spring," but 
" Cast Thyself" ; dejice teipsum. Comp. lavrous irXavai/Aey (i Jn. 
L 8). 

10. The fact that after TOU 4>u\d|<u <re Satan omits ev Tracreus 
Tat? oSots o-ou is in favour of the view that presumptuous rushing 
into danger is part of the temptation. To fling oneself down from 
a height is not going "in one's ways," but out of them. The 
disobedient Prophet was slain by the lion, the obedient Daniel 
was preserved in the lions' den. But "we are not sure that the 
omission of the words has this significance. 

11. em xpwi>. " On their hands," implying great carefulness 
The irpds \Wov has no special reference either to the temple or the 
rocks below : stones abound in most places, and He in the way 
of those who stumble. 

12. EtptjTau In Mt TLdXiv yeypcwrrai. Jesus had appealed to 
Scripture; Satan does the same; and then Jesus shows that 
isolated texts may be misleading. They may be understood in a 
sense plainly at variance with some other passage. Satan had 

1 See Edersh. Z, 6* T. L p. 304 ; Latham, Pastor Pastorum> p. 140. 



wggested that it was impossible to put too much trust in God 
Christ points out that testing God is not trusting Him. 

The verb tmtpdOw is wholly biblical (x. 25 ; Mt iv. 7 ; Ps. Ixrvii. 18). In 
the Heb. it is " Ye shall not tempt" : but in LXX we have the sing, as here. 

18. vdvra, TTipo(Tj$H. "Every kind of temptation": a further 
indication that He was tempted throughout the forty days, and tha' 
what is recorded is merely an illustration of what took place, 
The enemy tried all his weapons, and was at all points defeated. 
Comp. Tra<ra apaprta KOL jSAao-^/ua, "all manner of sin and 
blasphemy" (Mt xii. 31); irav S&Spov, "every kind of tree (Mt 
iiL 10); o ftev irdcnqs $5on}s curoXavcov icat /x^Se/uas ctTre^o/xevos 
^KoXaaTos, "he who enjoys every kind of pleasure," etc. (Arist 
Eth. Nic. iL 2. 7). 

axpi KcupoG. "Until a convenient season." This rendering 
gives the proper meaning both of axpt and of wupos : comp. Acts 
xiii. ii, xxiv. 25; Lk. xxi 24. It is Satan's expectation that on 
some future occasion he will have an opportunity of better success ; 
and an opportunity came when Judas was allowed to deliver the 
Christ into the hands of His enemies. That this was such an 
occasion seems to be indicated by Christ's own declarations: 
" The prince of this world cometh ; and he hath nothing in Me " 
Qn, xiv. 30) ; and " This is your hour and the power of darkness " 
(Lk. xxii. 53). Satan was not visible in a bodily shape then, and 
probably not on this earlier occasion. It is Peter who on one 
occasion became a visible tempter (Mt xvL 23; Mk. viii. 33). Not 
that we are to suppose, however, that Satan entirely desisted from 
attacks between the beginning and end of Christ's ministry : "Ye 
are they which have continued with Me in My temptations/' rather 
implies the contrary (xxii. 28); but the evil one seems to have 
accumulated attacks at the beginning and the end. In the wilder- 
ness he employed the attractiveness of painless glory and success ; 
in the garden he tried the dread of suffering and failure. All 
human temptation takes place through the instrumentality of 
pleasure or pain* 

Luke says nothing about the ministration of Angels which followed the 
temptation, as recorded by both Mt and Mk., not because he doubts such facts, 
for he repeatedly records them (L u, 26, u. 9, xxii. 43; Acts v. 19, viii. 26, 
xii 7, xxvii. 23), but probably because his source said nothing about them. Mk. 
seems to mean that Angels were ministering to Jesus during the whole of the 
forty days : his three imperfects ($>... fr ... Sniiedvovp) are co-ordinate. 

The Temptation is not a dream, nor a vision, nor a myth, nor a parable, 
translated into history by those who heard and misunderstood it, but an histor- 
ical feet. It was part of the Messiah's preparation for His work In His 
baptism He received strength. In His temptation He practised the use of it, 
Moreover, He thus as man acquired experience (Heb. v. 8) of the possibilities of 
evil, and of the violent and subtle ways in which His work could be ruined. 

Only from Himself could the disciples have learned the history of thlf 


struggle. Among other things it taught them the value of the Jewish Scriptures. 
With these for their guide they could overcome the evil one, as He had done: no 
special illumination was necessary (xvi, 29, 31). 

IV. 14-1X. 50. The Ministry in Galilee. 

Lt, like Mt and Mk., omits the early ministry in Judaea ; but 
we shall find that his narrative, like theirs, implies it All three of 
them connect the beginning of the Galilean ministry with the 
Baptism and the Temptation ; while Mt and Mk. make the im- 
prisonment of the Baptist to be the occasion of Christ's departure 
from Judaea into Galilee (Mt iv. 12 ; Mk. L 14). But they neither 
assert nor imply that John was imprisoned soon after the Tempta- 
tion ; nor do they explain why the arrest of John by Herod Antipas 
should make Christ take refuge in this same Herod's dominions. 
It is from the Fourth Gospel that we learn that there was a con- 
siderable interval between the Temptation and John's imprison- 
ment, and that during it Jesus went into Galilee and returned to 
Judaea again (ii. 13). From it also we learn that the occasion of 
the second departure into Galilee was the jealousy of the Pharisees, 
who had been told that Jesus was making and baptizing more 
disciples even than the Baptist Much as they disliked and feared 
the revolutionary influence of John, they feared that of Jesus still 
more. John declared that he was not the Christ, he " did no sign," 
and he upheld the Law. Whereas Jesus had been pointed out as 
the Messiah \ He worked miracles, and He disregarded, not only 
traditions which were held to be equal to the Law (Jn. iv. 9), but 
even the Law itself in the matter of the Sabbath (Jn. v. 9, 10). 
Thus we see that it was not to escape the persecution of Herod, but 
to escape that of the Pharisees, who had delivered the Baptist into 
the hands of Herod, that Jesus retired a second time from Judsea 
into Galilee. It was " after that John was delivered up " (Mk. L 14), 
and "when He heard that John was delivered up n (Mt iv. is), 
that Christ retired into Galilee. In neither case was it Herod's 
action, but the action of those who delivered John into the hands 
of Herod, that led to Christ's change of sphere. And in this way 
what is recorded in the Fourth Gospel explains the obscurities of 
the other three. 

There is a slight apparent difference between the first two Gospels and tht 
third* The three Evangelists agree in noticing only one return from Jute 


to Galilee, and possibly each knows of only one. But whereas Mt. and Mk. 
eem to point to the second return, for they connect it with the delivering up 
of the Baptist, Lk. seems rather to point to the first return, for he connects it 
with *' the power of the Spirit," an expression which suggests a reference to 
that power which Jesus had received at the Baptism and exercised in the 
Temptation. It is quite possible, however, that the expression refers to the 
power with which He had worked miracles and taught hi Galilee and Judsea ; 
in which case all three Gospels treat of the second return to Gahlee. 

Not very much plan is discernible in this portion of the Gospel j 
and it may be doubted whether the divisions made by com- 
mentators correspond with any arrangement which the writer had 
in his mind. But even artificial schemes help to a clearer appre- 
hension of the whole; and the arrangement suggested by Godet is, 
at any rate, useful for this purpose. He takes the Development tn 
the Position of Christ *s Disciples as the principle of his divisions. 

1. iv, 14-44. To the Call of the first Disciples. 

2. v. i-vi. ii. To the Nomination of the Twelve. 

3. vi 12-viii. 56. To the first Mission of the Twelve. 

4. ix. 1-50. To the Departure for Jerusalem. 

These divisions are clearly marked out in the text of WH., a 
space being left at the end of each. 

IV. 14-44. Tfo Ministry in Galilee to the Call of the first 
Discipks. The Visits to Nazareth and Capernaum. 

14, 15. Comp, Mt iv. 12; Mk. i. 14. These two verses are 
introductory, and point out three characteristics of this period of 
Christ's activity, i. He worked in the power of the Spirit. 2. His 
fame spread far and wide. 3. The synagogues were the scenes of 
His preaching (comp. ver. 44). 

14. IP rg Sui/dfLct TOU -nrciSjAaTos. This is perhaps to remind us 
that since His first departure from Galilee He has been endowed 
with the Holy Spirit and has received new powers (in. 22, iv. i, 18). 
Bengel's post vtctoriam corroboratus connects it too exclusively 
with the Temptation. Unless, with De Wette, we take K<xl <j>^fiirj 
e^jXGev as anticipating what follows, the statement implies much 
preaching and perhaps some miracles, of which Lk. has said 
nothing; for Jesus is famous directly He returns. The power of 
the Spirit had already been exhibited in Him. Jn. says that " the 
Galileans received Him, having seen all the things that He did in 
Jerusalem at the feast" (iv. 45). But it is not likely that they had 
heard of the wonders which attended the Birth, or of those which 
attended the Baptism. 

There are various marks of Lk.'s style, i. tiirtcrrpefcv, for which Mt. has 
&vex(bpvjffG> and Mk. 1}\0et>. Comp. ver. I, where Lk. has Marpeij/ev, while 
Mt has fafaffij. 2. dtvapts of Divine power. Comp. i. 35, and see on 
iv. 36. 3. Ktt$* t\y$ in this sense. Comp. xxni. 5; Acts k. 31, 42, x. 37: 


it is peculiar to Lk. See Simcox, Lang; of N. T. p. 14$, 4. ij * 

777, is an expression of which Lk. is fond (m. 3, iv. 37, vii. 17, viii. 37; Acts 

adv. 6) ; not in Jn., and only twice in Mt (ui. 5, xiv. 35) and jncc in Mk. 
(i. 28 ; not vi. 55). 

15. ical afirds ^8i8acrKi>. Lk. is so fond of this mode of transi- 
tion that avros possibly has no special significance ; if it has, it is 
" He Himself," as distinct from the rumour respecting Him. The 
imperf. points to His habitual practice at this time, and seems to 
deprive what follows of all chronological connexion. All the 
Gospels mention His teaching in synagogues, and give instances of 
His doing so during the early part of His ministry (Mt iv. 23, 
ix. 35, xii. 9, xiii. 54; Mk. L 21, 39, iii. i, vi. 2; Lk. iv. 44, vl 6; 
Jn vi. 59). Towards the close of it, when the hostility of the 
teachers became more pronounced, there is less mention of this 
practice : perhaps He then taught elsewhere, in order to avoid 
needless collision. It should be noticed that here, as elsewhere, it 
is the teaching rather than the worship in the synagogues that is 
prominent Synagogues were primarily places of instruction 
(xiii. 10 ; Jn. xviii. 20; Acts xiiL 27, xv. 21, etc.), and it was as 
such that Augustus encouraged them. Morality of a high kind 
was taught there, and morality is on the side of order. 

iv rats owaywycus afi-iw. This means in the synagogues of the 
Galileans. Galilee at this time was very populous. Josephus no 
doubt exaggerates when he says that the smallest villages had 
fifteen thousand inhabitants (B. J* iiL 3. 2^, and that there were 
over two hundred towns and villages. But in any case there were 
many Galileans. Among them there was more freshness and less 
formalism than among the Inhabitants of Judsea. Here the 
Pharisees and the hierarchy had less influence, and therefore 
Galilee was a more hopeful field in which to seek the first elements 
of a Church. On the other hand, it was necessary to break down 
the prejudices of those who had known Him in His youth, and had 
seen in Him no signs of His being the Messiah that they were 
expecting : and the fame of the miracles which He had wrought in 
Judasa was likely to contribute towards this. Thus the Judsean 
ministry prepared the way for the more promising ministry in 
Galilee. We have no means of estimating the number of Galilean 
synagogues; but the fact that such a place as Capernaum had 
either none, or only a poor one, until a Roman centurion was 
moved to provide one ("himself built us our synagogue, 1 ' viL 5), 
is some evidence that by no means every village or even every 
small town possessed one. The remains of ancient synagogues 
exist at several places in Galilee ; Tell-Hum, IrUd (the Arbek of 
i Mac. ix. 2\Jisch (Giscala), Meiron (Mero), Kasyoun^ Ndbartein^ 
and Kefr-Bereim* But it is^ doubtful whether any of these are oldcf 
tha.n the second or third century. 


The origin of synagogues is to be sought in the Babylonish captivity ; and 
they greatly increased in number after the destruction of the temple. The fact 
that Jewish legend derives the institution of synagogues from Moses, shows how 
essential the Jews considered it to be. The statement that there were at one 
time 480 synagogues in Jerusalem is also legendary ; but 480 may be a symbol* 
ical number. One has only to remember the size of Jerusalem to see the 
absurdity of 480 places of public instruction in it. But large towns sometimes 
had several synagogues, either for different nationalities (Acts vi 9; see 
Lomby and Blass) or different handicrafts. 1 

rfc itdvrvv. Because of the power of His preach* 
ing, especially when contrasted with the lifeless repetitions and 
senseless trivialities of ordinary teachers. 

16-3O. The Visit to Nazareth. Comp. Mt xiii. 53-58; ML 
vi 1-6. It remains doubtful whether Lk. here refers to the same 
visit as that recorded by Mt and Mk. If it is the same, he per- 
haps has purposely transposed it to the opening of the ministry, as 
being typical of the issue of Christ's ministry. He was rejected by 
His own people. Similarly the non-Galilean ministry opens with a 
rejection (ix. 51-56). In any case, the form of the narrative is 
peculiar to Lk., showing that he here has some special source. We 
are not to understand that the Galilean ministry began at Nazareth. 
More probably Christ waited until the reports of what He had said 
and done in other parts of Galilee prepared the way for His return 
to Nazareth as a teacher. 

16. ou TJK [di/a]T6pafjt/xcVos. This tells us rather more than 
ii. 51 : it implies, moreover, that for some time past Nazareth had 
ceased to be His home. But the addition of "where He had been 
brought up " explains what follows. It had been " His custom " 
during His early life at Nazareth to attend the synagogue every 
sabbath. It is best to confine Kara ro eia>0os to the clause in 
which it is embedded, and not carry it on to dvco-ny aixxyvwvai : it 
was possibly the first time that He had stood up to read at 
Nazareth. But the phrase may refer to what had been His custom 
elsewhere since He began His ministry; or it may be written from 
the Evangelist's point of view of what was afterwards His custom. 
We may therefore choose between these explanations, i. He had 
previously been in the habit of attending the synagogue at Nazareth, 
and on this occasion stood up to read. 2. He had previously been 
in the habit of reading at Nazareth. 3. He had lately been in the 
habit of reading elsewhere, and now does so at Nazareth. 4. This 
was an early example of what became His custom. In no case 
must the sermon be included in the custom. That this was His 
first sermon at Nazareth is implied by the whole context 

t On synagogues see Edersh. L* <5r* T. I pp. 430-450, Hist, of Jewish 
Motion, pp, 100-129, ed. 1896 ; Schurer, Jewish People in the T, off. C. ii. 2, 
00.52-89; Hausrath, N.T. Times y i. pp. 84-93; Plumptre in D. JB. } Leyrerw 
Herzog, PjRE, 1 ; Strack in Heizog. PRE?i and other authorities in Schurer. 


In D both TeOpa.fijj.tvos and a#r after ciwBfa are omitted, and the text 
runs, \$&v $ els ISafaptd faov ty Kara TO efo>0dj fr rjj rj/j^pq. r&v ffaffidTiav 
tit T^V ffvvayuyi/iv J but in the Latin the former word is restored, vtmetu 
vutcm in Nazared ubi erat nutncatus introibit sefundum coniuetudincm in 
sabbato in synagogam. The omissions are perhaps due to Marciomte in- 
fluence. According to Marcion, Chnst came direct from heaven into the 
synagogue, de cs&lo in synagogam (see p. 131) ; and therefore all trace of His 
previous hfe in Nazareth must be obliterated. He was not reared there, and 
was not accustomed to visit the synagogue there. Only a custom of attend- 
ing the synagogue existed. See Rendel Hams, Study of Codex Bess, p. 232, 
in Texts and Studies, ii. I. Comp. the insertions ix. 54, 55, which may be 
due to the same influence. 

The phrase /card TO elarlrff occurs in LXX Num. xxiv. I ; Sus, 13. It is 
characteristic of Lk. See on KO.T& TO 20os, L 8. With the dat KO.TO. TO duOdt 
occurs only here and Acts xvii, 2; and rf iJ/^/> Tc5v o-a^rfrwr occurs 
only here, Acts nil. 14, and xvL 13 : butcomp. Lk. xiii, 13, 16 and xiv. 5. 
It is a periphrasis for fr rots <raj3,, or fr T <ra/3., or row <ra/3., or T$ (ro/3. 

&vlarrt] dvcryi'wi'wu Standing to read was the usual practice, 
excepting when the Book of Esther was read at the Feast of 
Punm : then the reader might sit Christ's standing up indicated 
that He had been asked to read, or was ready to do so. This is 
the only occasion on which we are told that Jesus read. 

The lectern was close to the front seats, where those who were most likely 
to be called upon to read commonly sat. A lesson from the Thorah or Law 
was read first, and then one from the Prophets. After the lesson had been 
read in Hebrew it was interpreted into Aramaic (Neh. viii. 8), or into Greek in 
places where Greek was commonly spoken. This was done verse by verse in 
the Law ; but in the Prophets three verses might be taken at once, and in this 
case Jesus seems to have taken two verses. Then followed the exposition or 
sermon. The reader, interpreter, and preacher might be one, two, or three 
persons. Here Christ was ooth reader and preacher ; and possibly He inter 
preted as well. 1 Although there were officers with fixed duties attached to each 
synagogue, yet there was no one specially appointed either to read, or interpret, 
or preach, or pray. Any member of the congregation might discharge these 
duties ; and probably those who were competent discharged them in turn at the 
invitation of the d/^ttrway&ryos (Acts xiii. 15. Comp. Pbilo in Eus, Pr&p* 
Evang. viii. 7, p. 360 A, and Quod omnis probus Iwer xii.). Hence it was 
always easy for Jesus to address die congregation. "When He became famous 
as a teacher He would often be invited to do so.* And during His early years 
He may have read without interpreting or expounding ; for even those under 
age were sometimes allowed to read in the synagogues. We cannot infer from 
His being able to read that He Himself possessed the Scriptures. In N.T. 
is used in no other sense than that of reading-; lit. recognizing 

1 We have no right to infer from this incident that the Hebrew Bible could 
still be understood by the people. Nothing is said about interpretation ; bat 
we cannot assume that it did not take place. Mk. IT. 34 is evidence of some 
knowledge of O.T. in Aramaic. See Classical Review^ May 1894, p. 216, 
against Kautzsch, Grammatik des biblischen Aramdischen> p. 19. 

8 Comp. 'Awtor&j M ns rwr ^Lwret/xwrfrwj' ^(fnjyeaui T&purra, Kdl awofrwro, 
ots &TTO.S 6 filos brMffci rpfe TO j&Xrwr (Philo, De Septenario, vi.). See also 
the fragments of Philo in Eus. Prp. &oang. viii. 7. 12, 13, and viiL 12. 10^ 
ed. Gaisford. These three passages give us Philo's account of the synagogue 


again the written characters ; of reading aloud. Acts xiii. 27, rv. 21 ; 2 Cor. 
iii. 15 ; Col. iv. 1 6 ; I Thes. v. 27. 

17. TT8o0Tj. "Was handed" to Him, "was given over by 
handing": comp. faetyrow (ver. 42). It does not mean "was 
handed to Him in addition? implying that something else had 
been handed to Him previously. This meaning 5s not common, 
and is not found elsewhere in N.T. The reading of the Parascha^ 
or section from the Law, had probably preceded, and had been 
read possibly by someone else. This was the Haphthara^ or pro- 
phetic section (Acts 3011. 15). That Is. Ixi. i, 2 was the lesson 
appointed for the day is quite uncertain. We do not even know 
whether there was at that time any cycle of prophetical lessons, 
nor whether it would be strictly adhered to, if there was such. 
Apparently Isaiah was handed to Him without His asking for it ; 
but that also is uncertain. The cycle of lessons now in use is of 
much later origin ; and therefore to employ the Jewish lectionary 
in order to determine the day on which this took place is futile. 
On the other hand, there is no evidence that "Jesus takes the 
section which He lights upon as soon as it is unrolled " ; for cvpe 
quite as easily may mean the opposite; that He intentionally 
found a passage which had been previously selected. 

The more definite dvaim/as (& D) is probably a correction of 
(A B L and most versions). The former occurs nowhere m N.T., while the 
latter is very common : see esp. Rev. v. 2, 3, 4, 5, x. 2, 8, xx. 12. Fond as 
Lk. is of analytical tenses, fy yeypap/dvov occurs nowhere else in his writings i 
c<m yeypa/*. is common in Jn. (u. 17, vi. 31, 45, x. 34, xn. 14, 16). 

18. The quotation is given by the Evangelist somewhat freely 
from LXX, probably from memory and under the influence of 
other passages of Scripture. To argue that the Evangelist cannot 
be S. Luke, because S. Luke was a Gentile, and therefore would 
not know the LXX, is absurd. S. Luke was not only a constant 
companion of S. Paul, but a fellow-worker with him in dealing 
with both Jews and Gentiles. He could not have done this 
without becoming familiar with the LXX. 

Down to air<rraXKlv p. inclusive the quotation agrees with 
LXX. After that the text of LXX runs thus : loo-acrfleu TOVS crwre- 
Kapfitav, Kr)pvai a%u,aAam>ts afaariv KOL rv^A-ow dva- 
enavroV KU/H'OV oe/crdV. In many authorities the 
clause i<zcra<r0ai rovs {rwrer/H/i/ji&ovs T^V /ca/>3tay has been inserted 
into the text of Lk. in order to make the quotation more full and 
more in harmony with O.T. We have similar insertions Mt. xv. 
8 ; Acts vii. 37 ; Rom, 'xiii. 9 ; Heb. xiii. 20, and perhaps iL ;. 1 

1 Scrivener, Int. to Crtt. of N.T. L pp. 12, 13, 4th ed. 
The evidence against the clause /rf<ra<rai . . . TIJV icapdtav here (in K A Q of 
LXX rgyfo/>5tf) is decisive. It isomittedby BDLS,l3-69,33,mostMSS. of 


In the original the Prophet puts into the mouth of Jehoval 's ideal 
Servant a gracious message to those in captivity, promising them 
release and a return to the restored Jerusalem, the joy of which is 
compared to the joy of the year of jubilee. It is obvious that 
both figures, the return from exile and the release at the jubilee^ 
admirably express Christ's work of redemption. 

nyeujjux Kuptou eir* lfie. In applying these words to Himself the 
Christ looks back to His baptism. He is more than a Prophet; 
He is "the Son, the Beloved One," of Jehovah (lii. 21, 22). 

With 0* tfd (l<rn) comp. fy Ar* atfro? (ii. 25). o5 drew. Not "where- 
fore," as in Acts xix, 32, which here would spoil the sense, but * c because," 
a meaning which ofrVejce? often has in class. Grk. Vulg. has proptcr quod. 
Comp. Gen. xviii. 5, xix. 8, xxii. 16, acxxviii. 26 ; Num. x. 31, nv. 43, etc. 
Ionic form efoe/cey is found xvui. 29 ; Acts xxviiL 20 ; 2 Cor. lii. 

The Ionic form efoe/cey is found xvui. 29 ; Acts xxviiL 20 ; 2 Cor. lii. 10 1 
but tveicey is the commonest form (2 Cor. vii. 12), and ftrco also occurs before 
consonants (vi. 22 ; Acts xzvi. 21). 

fie. The Christ was anointed with the Spirit, as Pro- 
phets and priests were anointed with oil (i Kings xix. 16; Ex. 
xxviiL 41, xxx, 30). Unlike wej^s- (2 Cor. ix. 9), TTTWX^S "always 
had a bad meaning until it was ennobled by the Gospels" (vi 20, 
vii. 22 ; 2 Cor. VL 10 ; Jas. ii. 5). It suggests abject poverty 
(7rT()<rcrco=s"I crouch"). See Hatch, BibL Grk. pp. 76, 77. 

dir&rraXic& fi. Change from aor. to perf. "He anointed 
Me (once for all) ; He hath sent Me (and I am here) " : comp. 
i Cor. xv. 4. We have had oarooT&Xv of the mission of Gabriel 
(L 19, 26); here and ver. 43 we have it of the mission of the 
Christ; vii 27 of the Forerunner; ix. 2 of the Twelve. Whereas 
?r/wra> is quite general and implies no special relation between 
sender and sent, aTroo-rcXAco adds the idea of a delegated authority 
making the person sent to be the envoy or representative of the 
sender. But TTC^CO also is used of the mission of the Christ (xx. 13), 
of Prophets (ver. 26, xx.ii, 12), and of the Apostles (Jn. xiiL 20, 
xx. 21). Strictly speaking, alxjxa\(uTois means "prisoners of war" 
(aixjjuq and dXcoros): freq. in class. Grk. but here only in N.T. 
The cognate atx/AaAam'a> occurs xxi. 24 ; 2 Cor. x. 5 ; 2 Tim. iiL 
6; atx/^Xwcr/a, Eph. iv. 8. Neither this metaphor nor that of 
TU<|>XOIS dp\\|ui> harmonizes very well with the year of jubilee, to 
which Godet would restrict the whole passage. Both might apply 
to captives in exile, some of whom had been blinded by their 
captors, or by long confinement in a dungeon. 

dirocrreTXcu Te0pau<jjx>ous iv &4>&ru These words come from 
another part of Isaiah (Iviii. 6), and are perhaps inserted through 
a slip of memory. Jesus was reading, not quoting without book; 
and therefore we cannot suppose that He inserted the clause, 

Lat. Vet. and best MSS. of Vulg., most MSS. of Boh. Aeth. Arm. Syr-Sin., 
Orig. Eus. etc., all the best editors and RV. See Sunday, Aff. adN. T. p; 117, 


Lightfoot says that it was kwful to skip from one passage to an- 
other in reading the Prophets, but not in reading the Law (Hor. 
Heb. on Lk. iv. 17). That might explain the omission of a few 
verses, but not tiie going back thre$ chapters. The insertion 
comes from the Evangelist, who is probably quoting from memory, 
and perhaps regards the unconsciously combined passages as a 
sort of "programme of the ministry." The strong expression 
Tedpau<rp,fous is here applied to those who are shattered in fortune 
and broken in spirit 

For the pregnant construction, "send so as to be in," comp. i. 17. The 
asyndeton throughout, first between typatv and dwArraX/tej', and then oe- 
tween the three infinitives which depend upon (brAn-aX/cep, is impressive. 

19. liaauTOK Kupiou ScKroV. The age of the Messiah, which is 
Jehovah's time for bestowing great blessings on His people. 
Comp. xaipos SC/CTOS (2 Cor. vi. 2 ; Is. xlix. 8) : SCKTOS is not found 
in class. Grk. It is strange that Clement of Alexandria and 
Origen, who are commonly so ready to turn fact into figure, here 
turn an expression which is manifestly figurative into a literal 
statement of fact, and limit Christ's ministry to a period of twelve 
months (comp. Clem. Horn. xvri. 19). Keim and other modern 
writers have made the same limit; but the three Passovers dis- 
tinguished by S. John (ii. 13, vi. 4, xi. 55) are quite fatal to it. 1 
It is, however, an equally faulty exegesis to find the three years 
(/.. two years and a fraction) of Chrisfs ministry in the three 
years of Lk. xiii. 6-9 or the three days of xui. 31-33. The first of 
these is obviously a parabolic saying not to be understood literally; 
and the other probably is such. The suggestion that the three 
servants sent to the wicked husbandmen mean the three years of 
the ministry is almost grotesque. See Nosgen, Gesckjesu Christy 
Kap, viiL, Munchen, 1890. 

20. The vivid description of what followed the reading of the lesson points 
to an eye-witness as the source of the narrative. But the " closed " of A V. and 
RV. gives a wrong impression of the first incident : it leads one to think of a 
modem book with leaves. The Rhemish has "folded"; but "rolled up" 
would be a better rendering of irrrff as. The long stnp of parchment, or less 
probably papyrus (2 Jn. 12), would be wound upon a roller, or possibly upon 
two rollers, one at each end of the strip. Hence the name megillah (volumen) 9 
from g&fal, "to roll." Such a book was in Greek sometimes called /ee^aXk 
(Ezr, vi. 2; Ezek. iii. 1-3) or /te0aXis j&jSXfov (Heb. x. 7 ; Ps. xxxix. 8 ; Ezek. 
ii. 9) : and it is said that KefaXts originally meant the knob (cornu or umbilicus] 
at the end of the roller ; but no instance of this use of xe^aM* appears to be 
known (Wsctt on Heb. ac. 7). 

diroSoDs TW timf]prTj. The &ro- implies that it was the minister of 

1 On the uncertainty respecting the length of the ministry, and the con- 
jectuies respecting it made by early Christians, see Iren. ffter. ii* 22 ; Eus. 
& E. i. 10 ; Sanday in the Expositor^ 1st series, id. p. 16. 


ckazzan who had handed Him the book who received it back again. 
The T<3 may have the same meaning, just as TO f$if$\Lov means the 
book which had been given to Him But r<3 vTnypen? more prob- 
ably means the minister usually found in a synagogue. It was 
among the duties of the chazzan to take the Scriptures from the 
ark and put them away again (Surenhusius, Mishna, ii. 246, 
iii. 266). He taught the children to read, and inflicted the 
scourgings (Mt x. 17). A Roman epitaph to a Jew who held 
this office is quoted by Schurer, II. ii. p. 66 

louXiavo? VTnjpenjs 
<$Aa/?ia lovAiaviy Ovyarrjp mzrpc 


The chazzan of the synagogue became the deacon or sub-deacon 
of the Christian Church. 

A farqptnjs is lit. "an under-rower" (tp<r<ru). The word ma be used 
of almost any kind of attendant or servant (Acts v. 22, 26, xhi. 5; Mt 
xrvi. 58; Mk. xiv. 54, 65; Jn. Yii. 32, 45; i Cor. iv. i). For the two 
participles, unJfaj . . faroSofo, without U, comp. Acts iii. 4, 25. 

This was the usual attitude for expounding or 
preaching, and in the synagogues there was commonly a raised 
seat for the purpose. On other occasions we find Christ sitting 
to teach (v. 3; Mt v. i; ML iv, i; [Jn. viii. 2]); and the 
disciples do the same (Acts xvi. 13). 

$<ra.v dTFtJoKTs. " Were fixed intently." Their intense interest 
was caused by His reputation as a teacher and as a worker of 
miracles, as well as by His having been brought up amongst 
them ; perhaps also by His look and manner of reading. That 
He had selected an unexpected passage, or had omitted the usual 
lesson from the Law, and that this surprised them, is pure con- 
jecture. Comp. Acts vi. 15, where the same verb is used of the 
whole Sanhedrin riveting then* eyes upon Stephen. It is a 
favourite word with Lk v who uses it a dozen times : elsewhere in 
N.T. only 2 Cor. iii. 7, 13. It occurs in LXX (i Es. vL 28; 
3 Mac. ii. 26), in Aq. (Job vii 8), and in Jos. (B.f. v. 12. 3). The 
analytical tense marks the continuance of the action. 

21. ^p^aro 8c \yii'. The T/JO&XTO is not pleonastic : it points 
to the solemnity of the moment when His words broke the silence 
of universal expectation: comp. vii. 24, XL 29, xii. i, xiv. 18. 
What follows may be regarded as a summary of what was said. 
It gives us the main subject of His discourse. We are led to 
suppose that He said much more; perhaps interpreting to them in 
detail the things concerning Himself (xxiv. 27). The conversation 
with Nicodemus is similarly condensed by S. John (iii. 1-21). 
Even without this narrative we should know from viL 22 an<J Mt 


xi. 5 that Christ interpreted Is. Ixi. i ff. of Himself. The whole 
of the O.T. was to Him a prophecy respecting His life and work. 
And this applies not only to prophetic utterances, but also to rites 
and institutions, as well as to historical events, which were so 
ordered as to be a forecast of the salvation and judgment which 
He was to bring. 1 

% ypo4>$) aihr|. "This passage of Scripture" (Mk. xii. 10; JIL 
vii. 42, etc.) : for Scripture as a whole the plural is used (xxiv. 27, 
32, 45 ; Mt xxi. 42, xxh. 29, xxvi. 54, 56 ; Mk. xii. 24, etc.). 
His interpretation of the prophecy was at the same time a fulfil- 
ment of it; for the voice of Him of whom the Prophet wrote 
was sounding in their ears. Hence it is that he affirms ircirX^pwrai 
iv TOIS farw upoy. As Renan says, // ne prkhait fas ses opinions^ 
il scprtckait htimbne. 

22. l/ActprupouK OUTW. " They bore witness to Him," not that 
what He said about Himself, but that what rumour had said 
respecting His pow^r as a teacher, was true. They praised Him 
in an empty-hearted way. What they remembered of Him led 
them to think that the reports about Him were exaggerations ; but 
they were willing to admit that this was not the case. Comp. xi. 
48. This "bearing witness" almost of necessity implies that 
Jesus had said a great deal more than is recorded here. What 
follows shows that they did not believe the teaching which so 
startled and impressed them, any more than those whose attention 
was riveted on Stephen, before he began to address them, were 
disposed to accept his teaching. The cases are very similar. 
Hence Itfau^afov expresses amazement rather than admiration. 
For Oavfjidietv ev( see small print on ii. 33. 

rots X&yois TYJS x*P tT s- Characterizing genitive or genitive of quality ; 
freq. in writings influenced by Hebrew, " which employs this construction, not 
merely through poverty in adjectives, but also through the vividness of phrase- 
ology which belongs to Oriental languages (Win. xxxrv. 3. b, p. 297. Comp. 
otKOv6/MS -njs d&Arfas (xvL 8) ; /rprHjs TTJS d5i/tfay (xviii. 6) ; dtfpoarJjs &riXi7<r/*(W77f 
(Jas. i. 25) ; icpiral &aXo7i<r/*wv TrwqpQv (Jas. 11. 4) ; and perhaps the difficult 
rpoTryt diro<rKta<rfla (Jas, i. 17) The meaning here is "winning words " The 
very first meaning of xdpis (%a/)w) is ''comeliness, winsomeness " (Horn Od. 

1 "Jesus acknowledged the Old Testament m its full extent and its peifect 
sacredness. The Scripture cannot be broken, He says (Jn. x. 35), and forthwith 
draws His argument from the wording of it Of course He can only have 
meant by this the Scripture in the form in which it was handed down, and He 
must have regarded it exactly as His age did (comp. xi. 51). Any land of 
superior knowledge in these matters would merely have made Him incapable of 
placing Himself on a level with His hearers respecting the use of Scripture, or 
would hare compelled Him to employ a fer-reaching accommodation, the very 
idea of which involves internal untruthfulness. All, therefore, that is narrated 
in Scripture He accepted absolutely as actual history, and He regarded the 
several books as composed by the men to whom they were ascribed by tradition * 
(B. Weiss, Leben Jesu> I. iii. 5, Eng. tr. ii. pp. 62, 63). 


viii. 17$ ; Eccles. x. 12 ; Ps. adiv. 3 Ecclus. xxi. 16, xxxvii. 21 ; Col. Iv. 6) : 

and in all these passages it is the wmsomeness of language that is specially 
signified. From this objective attractiveness it easily passes to subjective 
"favour, kindness, goodwill," esp. from a superior to an inferior (Acts 11. 47 ; 
Gen. xvui. 3, xxxu. 5, xxxni. 8, etc.) ; and hence, in particular, of finding 
"favour" with God (i. 30; Acts vii. 46; Exod. xxxui. 12, 13, 16, etc.). From 
the sense of God's favour generally (n 40, 52 ; Jn i 14, 16) we come to the 
specially theological sense of " God's favour to sinners, the free gift of His 
grace " (Acts xiv. 3, xx. 24, 32 ; and the Pauline Epp. passim}. Lastly, it 
sometimes means the "gratitude" which this favour produces in the recipient 
(vi. 32-34, xvn. 9 ; i Cor. x. 30). The word does not occur in Mt. or Mk. 
See Sanday on Rom. i. 5, and Blass on Acts ii. 47 and iv. 33, 

Origen evidently had this passage in his mind when he wrote : " For a proof 
that grace was poured on Hts hps (Ps. xliv. 3, Qsxft&n i) X&P& & "xefaelp <rov) 
is this, that although the period of His teaching was short, for He taught 
somewhere about a year and a few months, the world has been filled with His 
teaching" (De Pnn. iv. i. 5). But the words so calculated to win did not win 
the congregation. They were " fulfilled in their ears," but not in their hearts. 1 
A doubt at once arose in their minds as to the congnnty of such words with one 
whom they had known all His life as the "son of Joseph" the carpenter. 
Here O&TOJ has a contemptuous turn, as often (v. 21, vii. 39, 49, rv. 2, xxii. 56, 
59, etc.) : yet the Vulg. in none of these places has tste, but kic* " Is not this 
person Joseph's son ? What does he mean by using such language ? " Just as 
a single sentence is given as a summary of His discourse, so a single question is 
given as a summary of their scepticism. 

While the oSroy and vl6s is in all three, the question as a whole differs. Mk. 
has Ofy o&r&s i<rriv o r^nw, o vlos r^s Ma/>fas ; (vi. 3). Mt. has Otf^ o&r6s torn* 

o rov TKTOVOS vl6s ; (xiii. 55). Lk. OO^i vl6s &rw *Iw<ri^ otfroy ; And while 
the others mention Christ's brothers and sisters in close connexion with His 
mother, Lk. mentions none of them. Lk. and Jn. seem to prefer the expres- 
sion " son of Joseph " (Lk. iii. 23, iv. 22 ; Jn. i. 45, VL. 42). Kenan thinks that 
Marc ne eonnatt pas. Joseph ( V. dej. p. 71). But it may be that, as he does 
not record the virgin birth of Christ, he avoids the expression "son of Joseph " 
or "the carpenters son," which those who have recorded the virgin birth could 
use without risk of being misunderstood. 

23. n<iro>s epetTe fjiot Trji' irapa|3oX$}i' raJrrjK "At all events, 
assuredly, ye will say," etc : marcus is used in strong, affirmations 
(Acts xxl 22, xxviii. 4 ; i Cor. ix. 10). Excepting Heb. ix. 9 and XL 
19, wapa^oXif occurs only in the Synoptic Gospels : in Jn. x. 6 and 
xvL 25, 29, as in 2 Pet. ii. 22, the word used is TOPOI/UO. It need 
not be doubted that the notion of placing beside for the sake of 
comparison^ rather than that of merely putting forth, lies at the root 
of vapaftoXy. From the notion of (i) "throwing beside" come 
the further notions of (2) "exposing" and (3) "comparing," all 
three of which are common meanings of -Trapa^oAActv. While the 
adj. -rrapa/SoAos represents the derived notion on the one side, the 
subst ^rapa/JoXiJ represents that on the other side. A irapafioXy, 
therefore, is "an utterance which involves a comparison." Hence 
various meanings : i. a complete parable or allegory (viiL 4, xiii. 6, 

1 Comp. Augustine's description of his indifference to the preaching ol 
Ambrose, although charmed with his winning style : Rerwn incuriosus ft &* 
t^pt<r adstabam & dtUctaoar wawtate strmonu zniiL 32). 


etc.) ; a. a single figurative saying, proverb, or illustration (here ; 
v. 36, vL 39) ; 3. a saying of deeper meaning, which becomes in- 
telligible through comparison, in which sense it is sometimes joined 
with o-Korcivos Xoyos {Prov. i. 6), Trpo^A^a (Ps. xhx. 5, Ixxviii. 2), 
and the like. In the teaching of Chnst Trapa/JoAif is commonly 
used in the first sense, and is a means of making known the 
mysteries of the kingdom in a mixed audience; for it conceal* 
from the unworthy what it reveals to the worthy (viii. 9, 10). See 
Crem. Lex* pp. 124, 657; Hatch, BibL Grk., p. 70 ; Hase, Gesck. 
fesu t 63, p. 535, ed. 1891 ; Didon, Jksus Christ^ ch. vi. p. 391, 
ed 1891 ; Latham, Pastor Pas forum, ch. x. 

*larp, OcpdireucroK trcauTcfo " Heal thine own lameness " is the 
Hebrew form of the proverb. Similar sayings exist in other litera- 
tures : e.g. a fragment of Euripides, aXXw tarpos, avros IX/cca-t 
/?pv(ov; Ser. Sulpicius to Cicero, Neque imitare malos medicos^ qui 
in alienis morbis profitentur fenere se medicine scientiam^ tpst se 
curare non posswit (Cic. Epp. ad diversos, iv. 5). Hobart quotes 
from Galen, exp^v ^ v <*vrov cavroS irparrov 10.0-60.1 TO o-v/ATrrto/i-a /cat 
ovros lirixtpiv Tepov$ Oepaircvciv. Comp. Aesch. P. V. 469 ; Ov. 
Metam. vu. 561 ; and the other examples in Lightfoot and Wetst. 
It is remarkable that this saying of Christ is preserved only by 
the beloved physician. Its meaning is disputed, Some take the 
words which follow to be the explanation of it : " Heal the ills of 
thine own town." Thus Corn, k Lap., " Cure Thine own people 
and Thine own country, which should be as dear to Thee as Thyself." 
Similarly Beng. Alf. Sadler and others. It is thus made to mean 
much the same as "Charity begins at home." But tarpc and 
vcavTov ought to be interpreted of the same person or group ; not 
one of a person and the other of his neighbours. "Prophet, 
heal Thine own countrymen " is not parallel to " Physician, heal 
Thyself? The saying plainly refers to the passage just read from 
Isaiah; and although Lk. omits the words "to heal the broken- 
hearted," yet Christ must have read them, and He had probably 
explained them. He professed to be the fulfilment of them, and 
to be healing the miseries of mankind. The people are supposed 
to tell Him to better His own condition before bettering that of 
others. He must make His own position more secure, and give 
evidence of His high mission before asserting it He must work 
convincing miracles, such as He is said to have worked elsewhere. 
Comp. <r<3ow 0-cavrov /cat ^/wts (xxiii. 39). 

oo-a ijKouo-afAcv. They do not say ocra *?ro7o r a9, wishing to leave 
it open whether the report may not be untrue. We learn from 
Jn. uV 12 that after the miracle at Cana, Jesus was at Capernaum 
for a short time ; and from John il 23, that there were many unre- 
corded miracles. It is probably to reports of some of these that 
reference is here made. For the constr. comp. Acts v*L 12 andxxiv. ia 


tls f^iv Ka^apvaovp* See on ver. 31. The readings vary "between e& 
r^y Ka0. (K B), efc Ka<. D L), to -TQ Ka. (x), and & Ka. (A K). The 
substitution of & for e/?, and the omission of the article between a preposition 
and a proper name, are obvious corrections by a later hand. The eh is not 
" put for fr." It may be doubted whether these two prepositions are ever 
interchanged. Rather cZs is used because of the idea of motion contained in 
" come to pass." It is scarcely possible that e/s contains the notion of " to 
the advantage of," and indicates the petty jealousy of the people of Nazareth. 
We have the same constr. i. 44 ; Acts xxviu. 6 (comp. Lk. xi. 7) ; and in no 
case is there any idea of advantage. That the jealousy was a fact, and that 
the people of Nazareth were inclined to discount or discredit all that seemed 
to tell in favour of prosperous Capernaum, is probable ; but there is no hint 
of this in the efe. What is said to have happened to Capernaum ought to 
happen here. Comp. the Cornish use of "to" for "at* In N.T. (SSeis 
never "thus," but either "hither" (ix. 41, xiv. 21, xix. 27) or "here" (ix. 
33, rrii. 38). The & TTJ varptdi <rov is epexegetic of $&>, and means " Thy 
native town," not the whole of Israel : comp. Mk. vL 5 ; Mt YJII. 58. 

24* Eire? $. When these words occur between two utter- 
ances of Christ, they seem to indicate that there is an interval 
between what precedes and what follows. The report of what 
was said on this occasion is evidently very condensed. Comp. 
vL 39, xii. 16, xv. n, xvii. i, 22, xviii. 9, and see on i 8* The 
Sc is "but" (Cov.) rather than "and " (all other English Versions); 
ait autem (Vulg.). "But, instead of gratifying them, He said." 
There are various proverbial sayings which declare that those who 
are close to what is great do not appreciate the greatness. Jesus 
declares that He is no exception to this rule, and implies that He 
will work no miracles to free Himself from its operation. In the 
wilderness He had resisted a similar suggestion that He should 
work a miracle of display, a mere repas (w. 9-11). In this matter 
Nazareth is a type of the whole nation, which rejected Him 
because He did not conform to their own ideas of the Messiah. 
Their test resembles that of the hierarchy, " He is the King of 
Israel; let Him now come down from die cross, and we will 
believe Him" (Mt xxviL 42). Et^rcv Sc is peculiar to Lk, (L 13). 

25. "But I am like the Prophets, not only in the treatment 
which I receive from My own people, but also in My principles of 
action. For they also bestowed their miraculous benefits upon 
outsiders, although there were many of their own people who 
would have been very glad of such blessings." Christ is here 
appealing to their knowledge of Scripture, not to any facts out- 
side the O.T. Testator hoc Dominu$ ex luce omnisdentia su& 
is not a legitimate inference. Arguments drawn from what was 
known to Him, but not known to them, would not be likely to 
influence His audience. Note o>s = " when." 

lv &XT)6cCoe. " On a basis of truth" : comp. Mk. xii 14. We have 
similar adverbial expressions in <Hr' &np (sc. potpas), Art *XoX?i*, rl 
Ar* dftelat. 


Ivl Ttj rpi'a Kal jujyas . Jesus, Hke His brother James (Jas. 
v. 17), follows Jewish tradition as to the duration of the famine 
In i Kings xviii. i we are told that the rain came in the third 
year, which would make the drought about two years and a half. 
But ever since the persecution under Antiochus Epiphanes, three 
years and a half ( = 42 months =1260 days) had become the 
traditional duration of times of great calamity (Dan. vii. 25, xii. 7 ; 
Rev. 3d. 2, 3, xii. 6, 14, xiii. 5). The Jews would regard "in the 
third year" as covering three years, and would argue that the 
famine must have continued for some time after the rain came. 

For tort e* af. of duration of time ("over," . "during"), comp. AcU 
xiii. 31, xix. 10 ; Hdt. ui. 59. 2, vi. 101. 3 ; Thuc. ii. 25. 4. Heb. xi. 30 is 
different In accordance with common usage Xi/t6j is here masc. ; but in 
xv. 14 and Acts xi. 28 it is fern. ace. to what is called Doric usage, as in the 
Megarean of Aristoph. Acharn* 743. But this usage occurs elsewhere in kte 
Greek. It perhaps passed from the Doric into the Ko^ AidXexrw: for 
examples see Wetst, and L. and S. Lex. In LXX perhaps only i Kings xviii. 2. 

Im irao-aK rt\v -f^v. Here, as in Jas. v. 17, only the land of 
Israel need be understood ; but it is possible that in each case we 
have a popular hyperbole, and that the whole world is meant 
LL xxL 23 and Rom. ix. 28 are not quite parallel, for there the 
context plainly limits the meaning. Lk. xxiii, 44 is another 
doubtful case, and there AV. has "earth" and RV. "land." 
Both have " land " here. 

S6, The translation of ef /M} in this and the following clauses by " but 
only" (RV.), W(Beza), or sed ionium^ is justifiable, because "save* (AV.) 
and nisi (Vulg.) seem to involve an absurdity which was not apparent to a 
Greek. It is not, however, correct to say that in such cases eJ pdi is put for 
d\X<, any more than in Mt, xx. 23 or Mk. iv. 22 it would be correct to say 
that dXXd is put for el ftf. Here and in Mt. xii. 4 (comp. Rom. xiv. 14 ; 
I Cor. vii, 17 ; Gal. i. 7, ii. 16) " the question is not whether el y^ retains 
its exceptive forces for this it seems always to do, but whether the exception 
refers to the whole clause or to the verb alone" (Lft. on Gal. i. 19) : comp. 
Rev. xxi. 27. In els Sd/>e*rra, r.r.A., we perhaps have a quotation from LXX 
of i Kings xvii. 9. There, as here, the readings vary between SiSQvos and 
StSwfos (sc. 777? or x^P -^ Here the latter is nght, meaning the territory of 
Sidon, in which Sarepta lay. Zarephath (in Syriac Tsarfah, in Greek 
Sd/*00a, S<prra, and S^^^a) is probably represented by the modern 
Srafend on the coast road between Tyre and Sidon. 

37. hr\ 'EXwrafov. For this use of &rt with a proper name to give a date, 
"in the time of," comp. lii. 2 ; Acts xi. 28 ; I Mac. xm. 42, xiv. 27 ; 2 Mac. 
xv. 22. The spelling E\t<r(ra.Los is not well attested (WH. n. App. p. 159). 
For some of the " many lepers " comp. 2 Kings vu. 3, where we have four at 
the gate of Samara. In N.T. 2%os is the only form of the adj. that U 
found, viz. here and perhaps Mk. vii. 26 ; but 2vpos, SJ//HOS, and 2vpiaic6s occur 
elsewhere (HdL ii 104. 6 ; Aesch. Pen. 83 ; Theophr. C. P. ii. 17. 3). 

28. iTrXTjo-Otjo-av ir<ns OufjtoO. See on L 66. They see the 
point of His illustrations ; He has been comparing them to those 
Jews who were judged less worthy of Divine benefits than the 


heathen. It is this that infuriates them, just as it infuriated the 
Jews at Jerusalem to be told by S. Paul that the heathen would 
receive the blessings which they despised (Acts xiii. 46, 50, xxiL 
21, 22). Yet to this day the position remains the same; and 
Gentiles enjoy the Divine privileges of which the Jews have 
deprived themselves. His comparing Himself to such Prophets 
as Elijah and Elisha would add to the wrath of the Nazarenes 
On the other hand, these early instances of God's special blessings 
being conferred upon heathen, would have peculiar interest for Lk 
29. fas 6<j>puos TOU opous. Tradition makes the scene of this 
attempt to be a precipice, varying from 80 to 300 feet in height, 
which exists some distance off to the S.E. of the town ; and we 
read that " they cast Him out of the town and led Him as far as 
the brow," etc. But modern writers think that a much smaller 
precipice close at hand is the spot Van der Velde conjectures 
that it has crumbled away ; Conder, that it is hidden under some 
of the houses. Stanley says that Nazareth "is built 'upon,* that 
is, on the side of, * a mountain ' ; but the * brow ' is not beneath, 
but over the town, and such a cliff as is here implied is to be found, 
as all modern travellers describe, in the abrupt face of the lime- 
stone rock, about 30 or 40 feet high, overhanging the Maronite 
Convent at the S.W. comer of the town" (Sin. & PaL p. 367]). 
So also Robinson (Res. in PaL iL pp. 325, 330), Racket (DJ?* iL 
p. 470), and Schulz in Herzog (PRE? x. p. 447). The !<' o$, of 
course, refers to TOT) opovs, not to o<puos. Both AV. and RV. have 
" the brow of the hill whereon," which might easily be misunder- 
stood. The town is on the hill, but not on the brow of it : the 
brow is above the modern village. Nowhere else in N.T. does 
o<pife occur. Comp. Horn. U. xx. 151 ; and opuos, //. xxiL 411, 
and Hdt v, 92. 10, with other instances in Wetst SuferdHum is 
similarly used : Virg. Georg. i. 108 ; Liv. xxviL 18, xxxiv. 29. 

The <5crre is not needed (i 22 ; Mt it 2, xr. 2$ \ 
Acts v. 31) ; but it expresses more clearly the result which was intended. 
Comp. xx. 20, where, as here, ftrre has been altered in some texts into the 
simpler els r6, a constr. which Lk. does not employ elsewhere. In be. 52 the 
true reading is perhaps ws ; but in Mt x. I, xxiv. 24, xxvii. I there is no doubt 
about the &<rre. For xaraAc/Mj/u/^co (here only in N.T.) comp. 2 Chron. 
xxv. 12 ; 2 Mac. xii. 15, xiv. 43 ; 4 Mac. iv. 25 ; Jos. Ant. vi. o. 2, ix. 9. x. 

The whole attempt to put Jesus to death was perhaps an instance of the form 
of punishment which the Jews called the "rebel's beating," which was some- 
what analogous to Lynch Law. The <f rebel's beating'* was administered by 
the people, without trial and on the spot, when anyone was caught in what 
seemed to be a flagrant violation of some law or tradition. Comp. the attempts 
to stone Jesus (Jn. viiL 59, x. 31). We have a similar attempt upon S. Paul's 
life (Acts xxi. 31, 32). In S. Stephen's case a formal trial seems to have ended 
in the "rebel's beating" (Edersh. The Ttmpk, p. 43). 

30. afr&$ 81 SteXO&i' Svct p&ou afrro? eiropcorro. "But He (in 


contrast to this attempt), after passing through the midst of them, 
went His way." The addition of Sta pla-ov is for emphasis, and 
seems to imply that there was something miraculous in His 
passing through the very midst of those who were intending to 
slay Him, and seemed to have Him entirely in their power. They 
had asked for a miracle, and this was the miracle granted to them. 
Those who think that it was His determined look or personal 
majesty which saved Him, have to explain why this did not 
prevent them from casting Him out of the synagogue, 1 It seems 
better with Meyer and ancient commentators to understand a 
miracle dependent on the will of Jesus comp. Jn. xviii. 6 \ Dan. 
vi. 22, Jn. viiL 59 is different : then Jesus hid Himself before 
escaping. For SicXOoSy see on ii. 15. 

liropiJTo. Here used in its common signification of going on 
towards a goal : " He went His way " to Capernaum. And, so far 
as we know, He did not return to Nazareth. It had become a 
typical example of "His own people receiving Him not" (Jn. 
i. n); and apparently it had no other opportunity (but see 
Edersk L. 6* T. L ch. xxviL). If Mk. vL 1-6 and Mt xiii. 
53-58 refer to a different occasion, it probably preceded this. 
After the attempt on His life He would not be likely to return ; 
and, if He did return, they could hardly, after this experience of 
Him, ask, *' Whence has this man this wisdom ? " or be astonished 
at His teaching. 

Meyer (on Mt ariii. 53), Wieseler (Chron. Syn. iii. 2, Eng. tr. p. 258), Godet 
(/.*., Eng* tr. i. p. 240], Tischendorf (Synop. Evan. 29, 54), and others dis- 
tinguish the two occasions. If with Gaspari (Chron. Int. 100) we identify 
them, then Lk. is the more foil and vivid, for the others omit the text of the 
discourse and the attempt to kill Hun. In this case Strauss may be right in s 
posing that Lk. has placed the incident at the beginning of the ministry, alt! 
it took place later, because he saw how typical it was of the ministry as a v 
(Lebenjesu, p. 121, 1864). That it was this attempt on His life which made 
Chnst change His abode from Nazareth to Capernaum is contradicted by ver. 
1 6. " Where He had been brought up " implies that He had ceased to reside 
^ere : and from ver. 23 we infer that Capernaum had already become His 
headquarters. Thither His Mother and brethren had also moved, while His 
sisters remained at Namreth (Mt niL 56 ; Mk. vi. 3), very probably because 
they had married there. 

31-44. The Stay at Capernaum : chiefly a Record of Mirades 
of Healing. See Wsctt Characteristics of the Gospel Miracles^ 
Macmillan, 1859 ; Introduction to the Study of the Gospels, App. 
E: "A Classification of the Gospel Miracles," Macmillan, 1888. 

31-37. The Healing of a Demoniac in the Synagogue at Caper- 

1 Even Godet is among these. La majestl de sa ptrsonne et la fermcttdt 
son regard impostrcnt a ces furieux. Dhistoric racontc pfasieurs traits scm* 
blanks (L p. 327, seme ed.). Better Didon: Une force divine I* gardait 
(p. 312, ed. 1891). See Hase, Gcsch. fcsu, p. 445, ed. 1891. 


naum. Mk. i 21-28. Both Lk. and Mk. place this first among 
Christ's miracles ; whsreas Mt puts the healing of a leper first 
(viii. 2-4). Marcion began his mutilated edition of Lk. at this 
point with the words *O EO'S /ccmyA.^ i$ Ka^apvoov/*. The 
earlier portion, which teaches the humanity of Christ, he omitted, 
excepting the first clause of iii. i (Tert Adv. Marc. iv. 7. i). 

3L KaTfjX0i>. Nazareth is on higher ground than Capernaum, 
which was on the shore of the lake; and therefore "went down" 
or " came down" is the probable meaning. But it is possible that 
here and Acts xviiL 5 it means "returned," as often in class. Grk. 
(Hdt iv. 4. 2, v. 30. 4; Thuc. viii. 68. 3). Excepting Jas. iii 
15, the verb occurs in N.T. only in Lk. (ix. 37 and twelve times 
in Acts). 

This is the correct spelling, Caphar-Nahum, of which 
j. is a Syrian corruption (WH. rL App, p. 160). It was the chief Jewish 
town, as Tibenas was the chief Roman town, of the neighbourhood. It was 
therefore a good centre, especially as traders from all parts frequently met 
there (Mk. ii. 15, iii. 20, 32, etc.). It is not mentioned in (XT., and perhaps 
was not founded till after the Exile. Josephus mentions it only once, TO. in his 
description of the lake (B. J. iii. 10. 7, 8), and then not as a town but as a 
rrjyTj yovtfjL&r&rr}, which irrigates the neighbourhood : but there is no doubt that 
the KefapvAw, to which Josephus was carried, when he was thrown from his 
horse in a skirmish with Roman troops, is Capernaum ( Vita, 72). The identi- 
fication with the modem Tell H^m (Nau, Pococke, Burckhardt, Renan, 1 Ritter, 
Rodiger, Ewald) is possible, but not certain. Many advocate the claims of 
Khan Mtnyeh, which is three miles to the south (Quaresmius, Keren, Robinson, 
Sepp, Stanley, Strauss, Wilson). For the chief arguments see Wilson in D.B<? 
i. p. 530, and in Picturesque Palestine^ ii. p. Si ; Schuk in Herzog, RB.* viL 
p. 501 ; Keim, Jes. of Nat*, Eng. tr. ii. p. 369 ; Andrews, Life c" 

r . .,, _, - _, ----- , __. ------ -, ------- , Life of 'our Lord, pp. 

221-239, ed. 1892. The doubts about the site show how completely the woes 
pronounced upon the place (ML ad. 23) have been fulfilled. But in any case 
J esus left the seclusion of the mountains for a busy mercantile centre by the lake. 

rfjs TaXiXaias. Lk. adds this, because this is the first 
time that he mentions Capernaum in his narrative. The explana- 
tion could not be made ver. 23. It is another small indication 
that he is writing for those who are not familiar with the geography 
of Palestine : comp. L 26, ii 4, viii. 26. 

$jy StSdo-KWF ofrro&s & TOIS arfppaonK. Some make m. 31, 32 a 
general introduction, stating the habitual practice, of which m. 
33-37 gave a particular instance. In support of this they urge 
the analytical tense, fy SiScurxcov, and the plur. row o-dpfiatnv: 
"He used to teach them on the sabbath days." But in the 
parallel passage StSaor/ccv and ^ ScScur/cw are equivalent, and 

1 Of the cinq petite villes dont fhumanitl farlera eternettement autant qu* 
de Rome et cFAtfones, Renan considers the identification of Magala (Medjdcl) 
alone as certain* Of Caphatnahum, Choradn, Dalmanutha, and Bethsaida he 
says, n est dowteux qiton arrive jamats sur ce sol profondement dtvastf, b 
let places <& fkumaniti vowtnut vemr Mur ftmfreinU dt us 
Jhus, p. 142). 


apparently refer to one occasion only (note the v#i's, ML i. 22, 23) : 
and ra cnlfifiaTo. is often sing, in meaning (Mt xxviii. i ; Col. ii. 
16 ; E\od. xx. 10 ; Lev. xxiii. 32 ; Jos. Ant i. i. i, iii. 6. 6, x. i ; 
Hor. Sat. i. 9. 69). Acts xvii. 2 is the only place in N.T. in which 
<rdf3/3u.ra is plur. in meaning, and there a numeral necessitates it, 
liri <rapj3ara rpia which, however, may mean " for three weeks? 
and not " for three sabbaths" Syr-Sin, here has " the sabbath days." 

The Aramaic form of the word ends in a, the transliteration of which into 
Greek looked like a neut. plur. This idea was confirmed by the fact that 
Greek festivals are commonly neut. plur. : ret y&foia,, tyKatna, irwa&'fivcua, 
if.r.X. Hence crd$3ctTa may either mean " a sabbath " or " sabbaths "or "a 
week." Here it is better to retain the sing, meaning, and refer the whole of 
32-37 to one occasion. In N.T. ffdftfaffw is the usual form of the dat. plur., 
with <r33dro as v.l. in some authorities (m B twice, Mt. xii. I, 12). la 
LXX <7ao.;5drotj prevails. Josephus uses both, 

02. ei' egouo-ujt fy 6 \6yos OUTOU. This does not refer to the 
power which His words had over the demoniac, but to the authority 
with which they came home to the consciences of His hearers. 
The healing of the demoniac was not so much an example of this 
eovcria as evidence that He had a Divine commission to exercise 
It Lk. omits the comparison with the formal and ineffectual 
teaching of the scribes (ML i. 22; Mt. vii. 29). 

The & means "clothed hi, invested with" (L 17, iv. 36, xi. 15, 18, 19, 
20, xx. 2, 8 ; I Cor. u. 4 ; Eph. vi. 2 ; 2 Thes. ii 9). This use of iv is freq. 
in late Grk. Green, Gram. ofN. T. p. 206. 

83. IK rfj crupayoiyfj. "In the synagogue" in which He was 
teaching on that sabbath; which confirms the view that ver. 31 
refers to a particular occasion. We have already been told that it 
was His practice to teach in the synagogues. But "in the syna- 
gogue" may mean in the only one which Capernaum possessed 

Saijwwou dica0<pTou. The phrase is unique, and 
the exact analysis of it is uncertain. The gen. may be of apposi- 
tion (ii. 41, xxii. i ; Jn. ii. 21, XL 13, xiii. i), or of quality (see on 
ver. 22), or of possession, i.e. an influence which belonged to an 
unclean demon (Rev. xvi. 14). As to the Evangelists' use of the 
epithet aKaQopTov, strange mistakes have been made. Wordsworth 
inaccurately says, "Both St. Mark and St. Luke, writing for Gentiles, 
add the word aKa.Qa.prov to ScupovLov, which St. Matthew, writing to 
Jews (for whom it was not necessary), never does." Alford in 
correcting him is himself inaccurate. He says, " The reil fact is, 
that St Mark uses the word Saipovw thirteen times, and never 
adds the epithet aKaQaprov to it (his word here is 7rvev/m only) ; 
St. Luke, eighteen times, and only adds it this once. So much 
for the accuracy of the data on which inferences of this kind are 


founded." Edersheim is still more Inaccurate in his statement of 
the facts \L. 6* T. i. p. 479 n). Farrar has the strange misstate- 
ment that " the word ' unclean ' is peculiar to St. Luke, who writes 
for Gentiles." It occurs in Mt, Paul, and Apoc., as well as Mk. 
The facts are these. Mt. uses Saipoviov ten times, and has 
aKaOapTov twice as an epithet of Tn/efyio. Mk. has Sat/ioviov thirteen 
times, and aJcdBaprov eleven times as an epithet of Trvctyia. Lk. in 
the Gospel has &u/tonov twenty-two times, with cucatfaprov as an 
epithet, once of Sat/xovtov, and once of ureOfta ; and with irovT/poV 
twice as an epithet of 'TTVCV/XO. In the Acts he has Sai/ioviov once ; 
and uses andBaprov twice, and frov^pov four times, as an epithet of 
wevfjia. The fact, therefore, remains, that the two Evangelists who 
wrote for Gentiles (to whom demons or spirits were indifferent) 
add a distinctive epithet much more often than the one who wrote 
for Jews (who distinguished evil spirits from good). Moreover, 
both Mk. and Lk. add this epithet the very first time that they 
mention these beings (Mk. i. 23 ; Lk. iv. 33) ; whereas Mt men- 
tions them several times (vii. 22, viii. 16, ix. 33, 34) before he adds 
the aKaOaprov (x. i). In this passage Lk. and Mk. describe the 
fact of possession in opposite ways. Here the man has the unclean 
spirit There he is in the unclean spirifs power, & werffum 
oica0apTa> : with which we may compare the expression of Josephus, 
rous &ro T(Sv SaifJLOvtw Xafiftavo^ovs (Ant. viii. 2. 5). Similarly, 
we say of a man that "he is out of his mind," or that "his mind 
is gone " out of him. That a man thus afflicted should be in the 
synagogue is surprising. He may have come in unobserved ; or 
his malady may have been dormant so long as to have seemed to 
be cured. The presence of "the Holy One of God" provokes a 
crisis. For d^icpc^ey comp. Josh, vi 5; i Sam. iv. 5; and for 
<|>(i)vfj H.Y<\Y) see on i. 42. 

84. *Ea. Probably not the imperative of laco, " Let alone, leave 
me in peace," but an interjection of anger or dismay ; common in 
Attic poetry, but rare in prose (Aesch. P. V. 298, 688; Eur. Hec. 
501 ; Plato, Prof. 314 D). Here only in N.T. Comp. Job iv. 
19 ?, xv. 1 6, xix. 5, xxv. 6. Fritzsche on Mk. L 24 (where the word 
is an interpolation) and L. and S. Lex. regard the imperative as the 
origin of the interjection, which does not seem probable, 

TI ifjp,ii> Kal cm, Not "What have we to contend about?" a 
meaning which the phrase has nowhere in N.T. and perhaps only 
once, if at all, in O.T. (2 Chron, xxxv. 21), but "What have we in 
common?" Comp. viii. 28; Mt viii. 29; ML L 24; Jn. iL 4; 
Judg. xi. 12; i Kongs xvii. 18; 2 Kings iii. 13; 2 Sam, xvl 10; 
i Esdr. L 26; Epict JKss. L i. 16, L 27. 13, ii. 9. 16. 

lt|<roi) Naapijvi This form of the adjective is found xxiv. 19 ; Mk. i 
24, x. 47, liv. 67, xvi. 6 ; but not in Mt. or Jn. or Acts. Its appearance 
here if no proof that Lk. is borrowing from Mk. Nafw/xubf occurs Lk. xviii. 


37 ; ML iL 23, zxvi. 71 ; Jn. acviii. 5, 7, rix. 19 j Acts ii. 22, Hi. 6, iv. 10, 

vi. 14, xxii. 8, rxvi. 9 ; but not in Mk. The adjective, esp. 
which is used in the title on the cross, sometimes has a tinge of contempt ; 
and with the article it may be rendered "the Nazarene." Hence the early 
Christians were contemptuously called " the Nazarenes " (Acts xxiv. 5), Con- 
trast 6 fab Nafc/^r (Mk xri. 1 1 ; Mk. i. 9 ; Jn. i. 46; Acts x. 38), which 
is a mere statement of fact. It is worth noting that this demoniac, who is a 
Jew, addresses Jesus as "of Nazareth," which the Gerasene, who 
a heathen, does not do (vhi. 28). 

diroX&rai TJfwte ; The ^/xas and the preceding rjiuv prob- 
ably do not include the man, but rather other evil spirits. Com* 
munem inter se causam habent d&monia (Beng.). It seems to he 
idle to speculate as to the meaning of dTroA&rcu : apparently it is 
the same as efe TTJV afiwo-ov amhffetv (viii. 31). 

otSd o- TIS ctj 6 fiyios TOU ecoG. In Mk. otSa/tcv, which is more 
in harmony with ij/uv and ^ttas. Godet remarks that 6 aytos TOV 
ou explains the knowledge. It was instinctive, and therefore 
oT8a is more suitable than ytvcoo-Kco. L antipathic rfest pas moznt 
elairvoyante qut la sympathit. In the unique holiness of Jesus the 
evil spirit felt an essentially hostile power. The expression 6 ayw* 
TOW ou occurs in the parallel in Mk. and Jn. vi. 69 ; but nowhete 
else: comp. Acts iv. 27; i Jn. ii. 20; Rev. iii. 7. It may mean 
either " consecrated to God " or " consecrated by God" In a lov>er 
sense priests and Prophets are called 5-ytot rov cov or K.vpiov (Ps. 
cvi. 1 6). It was not in flattery (male adulans, as Tertullian says) 
that the evil spirit thus addressed Him, but in horror. From the 
Holy One he could expect nothing but destruction (Jas. ii. 19; 
comp. Mt viii 29). 

35. iircTipicw afrrfi. " He rebuked the demon " who had used 
the man as his mouth-piece. Tha verb is often used of rebuking 
violence (ven 41, viii 24, ix. 42; Mt. viii. 26, xviL 18; Mk. iv. 39; 
Jude 9); yet must not on that account be rendered "restrain" 
(Fritzsche on Mt viii. 26, p. 325). 

In N.T. briripdu has no other meaning than "rebuke"; but in class. 
Grk. it means I. " lay a value on, rate " ; 2. " lay a penalty on, sentence " ; 
3. " chide, rate, rebuke." But while there is a real connexion between the 
first and third meanings of tht Greek verb, in English we have a mere 
accident of language : " rate" = " value " is a different word from " rate " = 
"scold " Note that Chnst required no faith of demoniacs. 

*ijjio$0if]Ti. Lit "Stop thy mouth with JL <IJLIOS, be muzzled ": 
used literally i Cor. ix. 9; i Tim. v. 18; and as here, Mt. xxii. 12; 
Mk. L 25, iv. 39; Jos. JB. J. i. 22. 3. The peculiar infin. fallow 
occurs I Pet ii. i$. Comp. airoBeKaroLv (Heb. vil. 5); Karaa-tajvoiv 
(Mt xiii. 32; Mk. iv. 32). The verb is probably a vernacular 
word: it is not found between Aristoph. (Nub. 592) and LXX 
(Kennedy, Sources ofN.T. Grk. p. 41). 


xal gcX0c &IT* O-&TOV. This is the true reading. Other writers commonly 
have ^fpxofML Ac; but Lk. prefers t&pxofuu &r6 (ver. 41, v. 8, viii. 2, 29, 
33* 35. 38, ix. S 24, etc.). 

ii|rap auroy . . . fi/qBe? p\<\|fOK auroV, " Having thrown him M 
down in convulsions (<rjrapdav Mk.) . . . without (as one might 
have expected) having injured him at all" With ov$& fiXd\!/av we 
should have had a mere statement of fact But in N.T we com- 
monly have py with participles : comp. xi. 24, xiL 47, and see Win. 
fr* 5 A P- 607. For pi]$ev Xai/rav Mk. has ^conjo-av $w$ p.ydkg. 
It was the convulsions and the loud cry which made the spectators 
suppose that the man had been injured. The malice of the demon 
made the healing of the man as painful as possible, Hobart 
classes both piirrav and /SXaVrav as medical words, the one being 
used of convulsions, the latter of injury to the system (Med. Lang. 
o/Lk. p. 2). 

36. ey&ero 6(ftos. Mk. has MappyOija'av ; but Lk. is fond of 
these periphrases with yivojuu (L 65, vi 49, viiL 17, xiL 40, xiii, 2, 4, 
xviii. 23, etc.) : see on iii. 22. The word expresses amazement 
akin to terror, and the subst. is peculiar to Lk. (v. 9; Acts iii. 10). 
Just as Christ's doctrine amazed them in comparison with the 
formalism of the scribes, so His authority over demons in compari- 
son with the attempts of the exorcists : all the more so, because a 
single word sufficed for Him, whereas the exorcists used incanta- 
tions, charms, and much superstitious ceremonial (Tob. viil 1-3 ; 
Jos. Ant. viii. 2. 5; Justin, Afol. ii. 6; Try. Ixxxv.). 

TIS 6 Xoyos oSros. Not, Quid hoc rei estl "What manner a 
thinge is this?" (Beza, Luth. Tyn. Cran. Grotius), but Quod tst 
hoc verbuml "What is this word?" (Vulg. Wic. Rhem. RV.). 
It is doubtful whether in N.T. Xoyos has the meaning of " event, 
occurrence, deed": but comp. L 4 and Mk. i. 45. Whether Xoyos 
is here to be confined to the command given to the demon, or 
includes the previous teaching (ver. 32), is uncertain. Mk. i. 27 is 
in favour of the latter. In this case we have an ambiguous on to 
deal with; and once more "because" or "for" is more probable 
than " that " (see on L 45). But if " that * be adopted, 6 Xoyos has 
the more limited meaning : "What is this word, that with authority?" 

Iv ou<ri ical Bufdfiet. lorxrufr cuinonpotest contradict; &W/m, 
fut non potest resisti (Beng.). ML has K<LT Ifouo-tav only. The 
beloved physician is fond of Swo/us, esp. in the sense of " inherent 
power of healing" (v. 17, vi 19, viiL 46, ix. i; Acts iiL 12, iv. 7, 
vi. 8). Mk. has it only once in this sense (v. 30), and Mt not at 
all The plural in the sense of " manifestations of power, miracles " 
^x. 13, xix. 37), is freq. in Mt and Mk. See on Rom. i. 16. 

87* igeiropctfcTo TJX ^P^ cwrou. In these sections attention is 
often directed to the impression which Jesus made on His audi- 


ences (w. 20, 22, 32, 36, v. 26), and to the fame which spread 
abroad respecting Him (jw. 14, 15, 37, 40, v. 15, 17). *HXOS (6) 
occurs only here, Acts ii. 2, and Heb. xii. 19. In xxi. 25, yx ov * 
may be gen. of either 9 ^w or ?X OS - But fc ^ e existence of TO 
ifX<* is doubtful The more classical word is ^ ^7 f which 
6 Ijxps is a later form. Hobart classes it as a medical word, esp. 
for noises in the ears or the head (p. 64). 

As already stated, this healing of a demoniac is recorded 
by ML, but not by Mt Ebrard and Holtzmann would have us 
believe that it is to compensate for this omission that Mt gives two 
demoniacs among the Gadarenes, where Mk. and Lk. have only one. 

In considering the question of demoniacal possession we must never lose sight 
of the indisputable fact, that our sources of information clearly, consistently, and 
repeatedly represent Christ as healing demoniacs by commanding demons to 
depart out of the afflicted persons. The Synoptic Gospels uniformly state that 
ftsus went through the form of casting out demons. 

If the demons were there, and Christ expelled them and set their victims 
free, there is nothing to explain : the narrative is in harmony with the facts. 

If the demons were not there, and demoniacal possession is a superstition, we 
must choose between three hypotheses. 

I* Jesus did not employ this method of healing those who were believed to 
be possessed, but the Evangelists have erroneously attributed it to Him. 

2. Jesus did employ this method and went through the form of casting out 
demons, although He knew that there were no demons there to be cast out. 

3. Jesus did employ this method and went through the form of casting out 
demons, because in this matter He shared the erroneous belief of His con- 

On the whole subject consult articles in />..*, Schaff-Herzog, Ency. Brit. 
on "Demoniacs," "Demons," " Demonology " ; Trench, Miracles, No. 5; 
Caldwell, Contemp. Rev* Feb. 1876, vol. xxvii. pp. 369 ff. No explanation is 
satisfactory which does not account for the uniform and repeated testimony of 
the Evangelists* 

88, 89. The Healing of Peter's Mother-in-law. Mk. L 30. 

It is quite beyond doubt that the relationship expressed by vevBepd, is either 
"wife's mother 1 ' or "husband's mother" (xu. 53; Mt viii. 14, x. 35; Mk. 
i. 30; Ruth i, 14, ii. n, 18, 19, 23; Mic. viu 6; Dem Plut Lucian). So also 
Tcj>$cp6s is either "wife's father" or "husband's fether" (Jn. xviii. 13; Gen. 
xxxviij. 25, 38; Judg. L 16; i Sam. iv. 19, 21 ). But for "wife's father" the 
more indefinite ytjlppof ("a relation by marriage") is freq. in LXX (Exod. 
iii. i, iv. 18; Num. x. 29 ; Juo. iv. n, xix. 4, 7, 9). In Greek there is a dis- 
tinct term for " stepmother," viz. the very common word ivqrpw& (Horn. Hes. 
Hdt ^Esch. Plat. Plut.); and if Lk. had intended to designate the second 
wife of Peter's father, he would have used this term. That he should have 
ignored a word in common use which would express his meaning, and employ 
another word which has quite a different meaning, is incredible. That Peter 
was married is clear from x Cor. ix. 5. Clement of Alexandria says that Peter's 
wife helped him in ministering to women, an apostolic anticipation of Zenana 
missions (Strom, iii. 6, p. 536, ed. Potter). He also states that Peter and Philip 
had children, and that Philip gave his daughters in marriage (ibid. p. 535, ed. 
Potter, auoted Bus. H. . in. 30, i) ; but he gives no names. It is remarkable 
that nothing is known of any children of any one Apostle. This is the first 
mention of Peter by Lk-, who treats him as a person too well known to need 
introduction. For other miracles of mercy on the sabbath see on xiv. x. 


38. 'Araor&s Sc diro -rijs owa-yor^s. This may refer to Christ's 
rising from His seat ; but it is more natural to understand it of 
His leaving the synagogue. The verb is used where no sitting or 
lying is presupposed, and means no more than preparation for 
departure (i. 39, xv. 18, 20, xxiii. i; Acts x. 20, xxii. 10): see on 
i. 39. ML has c^eXflovrcs, the plur. including Simon and Andrew, 
James and John. Neither Lk. nor Mt. mention the presence of 
disciples, but Peter, and perhaps Andrew, may be understood 
among those who rjpuTrjo-av avrov 7Tpl avTTJs. 

OWCXOJJ^JTJ irupcTw jieydXw. Perhaps all three words are medical, 
and certainly oW^o/m* occurs three times as often in Lk. as in the 
rest of N.T* Galen states that fevers were distinguished as 
"great" and "slight," /icyoA-ot and a-jjaxpol (Hobart, p. 3). Comp. 
Plat. Gorg. 512 A. Note the analytical tense. 

39. ITTIOT&S etrdvto ourfjs ^ireTtfiTjcreK. Instead of this both Mt 
and Mk. state that He touched her hand. Proximus accesses 
ostendebat, wrtuti Jesu cedere morbum, neque ullum eorpori ejus a 
morbo imminere periculum (Beng.). The eVeri/^crey of ver. 35 does 
not show that the use of the same word here is meant to imply that 
the fever is regarded as a personal agent But comp. xiii. u, 16; 
Mk. ix. 17, 23. The a<l>rJKv, which is in all three narratives, 
harmonizes with either view. In any case this unusual mode of 
healing would interest and impress a physician; and Lk. alone 
notices the suddenness with which her strength returned. For 
nupaxpTjp,*" see on v. 25. 

Si7jKoi/i afrrots. Mk. has avroJ : the avrots includes the disciples 
and others present. Her being "able to minister to them proves 
the completeness of the cure. Recovery from fever is commonly 
attended by great weakness. And this seems to be fatal to the view 
of B. Weiss, that Christ's cures were " momentary effects produced 
by His touch, which, although the result was absolutely certain, yet 
merely began a healing process that was completed in a perfectly 
natural way." What is gained by such an hypothesis ? 

The Attic form of the imperf. of ftajcorfo is tiiSicfoow ; but StyKtvov? if 
the reading of the MSS. in Eur. CycL 406 (Veitch, s.v.). Comp. TOL 3; Mt, 
iv. n, viii. 15; Mk* L 13, 31 ; Jn. adL 2; I Pet L 12. 

40, 4L Numerous Healings in the Evening. Nous rencontrom 
id un de ces moments dans la vie du Seigneur ou la puissance miracu* 
kuse se deploy ait avec une richesse particuliere : vL 19" (Godet, 
L P- 339)' Comp. Mt. viiL 16, 17; ML L 32-34* The healing 
of the demoniac (ver. 35), and of Peter's mother-in-law, had proved 
!hat He could heal diseases both of mind and body. AH three 
note the two kinds of healing; but "the physician separates the 
two with special distinctness, and lends no support to the view 
that possession is merely a physical disorder. 1 " 


40. AUVOKTOS SI TOO rjXiou. Mt has 'Octets 8 yevopwys, while 
Mk. has *Oi/rias S yevo/i^s, or* ISvcrcv 6 i}A.ios. We infer that 
here Mk. gives us the whole expression in the original tradition, of 
which all three make use ; and that Mt. uses one half and Lk* the 
other half of it See v. 13, xxii. 34, xxiii. 38, for similar cases. 
Some infer that ML has combined the phrases used by the other two, 
and therefore must have written last of the three. But an analysis 
of the passages which all three have in common shows that this is 
incredible. The literary skill required for combining two narra- 
tives, without adding much new material, would be immense ; and 
Mk. does not possess it It is much simpler to suppose that Mk. 
often gives the original tradition in full, and that the other two 
each give portions of it, and sometimes different portions. See E. 
A. Abbott, Ency. Brit, gth ed, art. "Gospels," and Abbott and 
Rushbrooke, The Common Tradition of the Syn. Gosf. p. vL 

Arfronros. "When the sun was setting? or "ere the sun was 
set," as the hymn gives it. 1 The eagerness of the people was such 
that the very moment the sabbath was over they began to move 
the sick : comp. Jn. v, 10. Note Lk.'s favourite airavres. 

IA indaTw aurwy rds x *P a $ ^irmflcis. Lk. alone preserves this 
graphic detail, which emphasizes the laborious solicitude of the 
work. Sic singuli pemtius commoti sunt adfidem (Beng.). It does 
not apply to the demoniacs, who were healed Aoyo>, as Mt states. 

The action is a generally recognized symbol of transmission, especially in 
conferring a blessing (Gen. xlyiii. 14 ; Ley. ix. 22, 23 ; Mk. x. 16). It is also 
used to symbolize the transmission of guilt (Lev. i. 4, iii. 2, viti. 14, xvi. 21, 
22). The statement that " our Lord healed at first by laying on of hands, but 
gradually passed over to the exclusive use of the word of power, in order that 
He might not encourage the popular idea that there was a necessary connexion 
between the laying on of hands and the cure," is not confirmed by Scripture. 
The nobleman's son and the man nt Bethesda were healed by a word (Jn. iv. 50, 
v. 8) ; Malchus, by a touch. There was no necessity to use either word or 
touch* He could heal by an act of will, and at a distance from His person 
(vii. 10, rvii. 14 ; Jn. iv. 50). But He more often used means, possibly to aid 
the faith of those who needed healing (xiii 13, xiv. 4, ML viii. 3, ix. 29 ; Mk. 
vii 33, viii. 23, 25 ; Jn. ix* 6 : comp. Mk. v. 23, 28, 41, vii. 32, vui. 22). 
The fact that Jesus commonly used some action in healing made the Jews the 
more irate at His healing on the sabbath. Excepting Acts xvu. 25, tfepcwretfw in 
N.T. is always "heal, cure," not merely "serve, take care of.*' Like cokre^ it 
is used of service both to God and to men ; and like curare, it is both " to care 
for "and "to cure.*" The imperfects, ^fcpdrevep and ^p%ero, mark the con- 
tinuance and repetition of the actions. 

41* e^pxero Be ital SatpoVia far& iroAXwy. " But demons also " 

1 The form Sfou seems to be Ionic, but occurs once or twice in Attic prose 
(Veitch, ;.9.). Except tdvcev or tSv in Mk. i. 32, the word does not occur again 
in N.T. Itisfreq. in LXX (Judg. xiv. 18; aSam. ii. 24; i Kings xxii. 365 
3 Chron. xviiL 34, etc.). It means " sink into, enter," T6rrov or the like being 
expressed or understood. Lk. never uses the undassical fyta (ix. 12, xxii. 14, 
*""- 54, xxiv, 29), which occuzi oftf * Mt and Mk. and twice in Jn. 


(as well as diseases) " came out of many." For 81 KCH see on iii. 9, 
and for c|epx<rdai du<5 see on ver, 35 : both are characteristic of 
Lk. He alone mentions the xp&lew of the demons. There is not 
much difference between 6 wos rov ov here and o ayios ro cov 
in ver. 34. In both cases it is the presence of Divine holiness 
which is felt and proclaimed. Phil. ii. 10 is here not to the point; 
for Karax&ovia there probably does not mean devils. 

oft* eia aura XaXcIv, cm. "He suffered them not to speak, 
because." Not, "suffered them not to say that"; which would 
require Af/av. In N.T. AoActv and Aeyew are never confused ; not 
even Rom. xv. 18; 2 Cor. XL 17; i Thes. i. 8. Excepting Mt 
xxiv. 3 and i Cor. x. 13, caw is peculiar to LL in N.T. (xxii. 55; 
Acts v. 38, xiv. 1 6, xvi. 7, xix. 30, xxiii. 32, xxviL 32, 40, xxviii 4); 
and (W is the usual form of imperf. 

Godet's suggestion, that the demons wished to compromise Jesus by exciting 
a dangerous enthusiasm among the people, or to create a belief that there was a 
bond of connexion between their work and His, is gratuitous. Their cries are 
more like involuntary exclamations of dismay. That Jesus should not allow 
them to make Him known was natural, although Strauss condemns it as incon- 
sistent. Nee tempus crat, nee hipracones (Beng. on Mk. iii. 12). ** It was not 
meet that unclean demons should usurp the glory of the apostolic office" (Cyril 
Alex.). Jesus had rejected the offered assistance of the evil one in the 
wilderness, and could not desire to be proclaimed as the Messiah by Hit 
ministers. Moreover, while the national ideas respecting the Messiah remained 
so erroneous, the time for such proclamation had not yet come. Comp. 
Jn. vi. 15. 

42, 43. The Multitude's Pursuit of Him. Comp. Mk. i. 35-39 
Although Lk. has some features which Mk. has not, the latteVs 
account is more like that of an eye-witness. 

42. reKojUnjs Se ^pas. See on vl 12. Mk. has the strong 
expression wpcot Zwvxa- AiW. It was so early that it was still like 
night. This shows His anxiety to escape the multitude and secure 
time for refreshment of His spiritual nature by converse with God : 
Mk. adds KcuccZ ^poo^x*. Jesus had probably passed the night 
in Simon's house ; and for 01 o^oi Mk has 5/*o>v *at ol /ier avrov, 
for as yet Jesus had no fixed disciples. Peter in telling ML of the 
incident would say, " We went after Him.^ 

ot oxXoi lircJ^Touy afrroV. "The multitudes kept seeking for 
Him." The rt- marks the direction of the search : comp. br&ofhj 
(ver. 17). They wanted more of His teaching and of His 
miraculous cures. See on xL 29. But neither this nor the 
iroAASv in ver. 41 proves that there had not been time to heal all 
who came the previous evening. Would He have sent any empty 
away ? Lk. is fond of recording the eagerness of the people to 
come to Christ (v. i, 19, vi 19, viii 19, 40, xiL i, xxL 38; compt 
xix. 3 and xxiii. 8). 



They did not leave off seeking until they reached Him, and they 
tried to stay Him from going away from them. 

This use of tas with a person is not classical : comp. fot %p& (Acts 
ix. 33) and fws rou powiX^wj (i Mac, ill. 26). Of place (iv. 29, x. 15) or of 
time (xxiii. 44) Jfwi is common enough. 

With jccweocoy (raiperf. of attempted or intended action) comp. AwfcXow 
(L 59). The TQV JA)I vopetico-Qcu is not Lk.'s favourite construction to express 
purposes or result (see on i, 74), but the gen. after a verb of detention or 
prevention: comp. Rom. xv, 22. For the apparently superfluous negative 
comp, xx. 27, xxiv, 1 6 ; Acts x* 47, xiv. 18, xx* 27. Win* xliv. 4. b, p. 409 ; 
Ixv. a. ft p. 755. 

43. Kal rats drfpais iro'Xecny. Placed first for emphasis. " To 
the other cities also (as well as to Capernaum) I must preach the 
good tidings." It is a rebuke to them for wishing to monopolize 
Him. It is not a rebuke for interrupting His preaching by 
requiring Him to work miracles. There is no evidence that He 
ever regarded these works of mercy as an interruption of His 
ministry, or as an unworthy lowering of it. On the contrary, they 
were an essential part of it ; not as evidence of His Messiahship, 
but as the natural work of the great Healer of body and soul. 
They were, moreover, an important element in His teaching, for 
His miracles were parables. As evidence they did not prove His 
Messiahship, and He did not greatly value the faith which was 
produced by them (Jn. ii. 23, 24). He Himself regarded them as 
merely auxiliary (Jn. xiv. n). He warned His disciples that false 
Christs and false prophets would work miracles (Mk. xm. 22), just as 
the O.T. had warned the Jews that a Prophet was not to be believed 
simply because he worked miracles (Deut xiii. 1-3). And, as a 
matter of fact, Christ's miracles did not convince the Jews (Jn. 
xiL 37). Some thought that He was a Prophet (vii. 16, ix. 8, 19 ; 
Mt xxL ii ; Jn. ix. 17), a view taken even by His disciples after 
the crucifixion (xxiv. 19); while others attributed His miracles to 
Satanic agency (Mt xii. 24). On the other hand, the Baptist, 
although he wrought no miracles, was thought to be the Messiah 
(see on iii. 15). The saying here recorded does not mean, theie- 
fore, " You are mistaking My work. I came to preach the good 
tidings, not to do works of healing " : but, " You are selfish in your 
desires. I came to preach the good tidings and to do works of 
healing to all, and not to a favoured few." For cfiayycXurcKrSai see 
on iL 10. 

8. For the second time (iL 49) Christ uses this word respect- 
ing His own conduct Comp. ix. 22, xiii. 33, xvii. 25, xix. 5, 
xxiL 37, xxiv. 26, 44, 46. His work and His sufferings are ordered 
by Divine decree. The word is thus used of Chnst throughout 
N,T. (Acts iil 21, xvii 3 ; i Cor. xv. 25). 

p TOO 6coG. This is Lk.^5 first use of this frequent 


expression (vi. 20, vii. 28, viiL i, 10, etc.), which Jn. employs twice 
(iii. 3, 5), Mt. thrice (xii. 28, xxi. 31, 43), and Mk. often. For its 
import see Ewald, Hist of Israel, vi., Eng. tr pp. 201-210; 
SchafFs Herzog, art "Kingdom of God"; Edeish. Z. 6* T. L 
pp. 265-270. The M, TOUTO refers to the whole of what precedes : 
" For this end," viz. " to preach the good tidings everywhere in the 
land." For this use of ear* comp. xxiii, 48 and Mt xxvL 50. It 
is quite classical (Xen. Anab. ii. 5. 22, vii. 8. 4). For direordXij^ 
see on ver. 18, The evidence for it (KBCDLX) as against 
ttWoroA/xcu (A Q R) is overwhelming. Yet Godet says on peui 
Msiter. It refers to the mission from the Father, as does the 
$}A.0ov of Mk. But it is possible to give the latter the inadequate 
interpretation of leaving the house at Capernaum. 

44. Kcu r\v KT]puoro-oiK els Tas owaywycte rfjs *lou$<ua$. This 
statement forms a conclusion to the section (14-44); and the 
analytical tense indicates that what is stated continued for some 

Both Lk. and Mk. have cb rii (rwaywyd*, which in both cases has been 
altered into the easier & rats ffwayvycfis. The e/j may be explained as 
pregn. constr., *' He went into the synagogues and preached there " or as ex- 
pressing the motion or direction of the preaching (Mk. iv. 15 ; Jn. viiL 26). 
Comp. & rbv $frw ravra X^ywv (Thuc. v. 45. i). It seems probable that 
the reading 'lovtiatas (KBCLQR) is the original one, which has been 
corrected to ToXtXatej (A D X T A A H) on account of its difficulty. But, ai 
in L 5 and vii. 17, Judaea may here mean the whole country of the Jews, 
Palestine. Lk. often uses 'lovdata in this sense (xxiii. 5 ; Acts ii 9, x. 37, 
xL i, 29, xxvi. 20 ; comp. Gal. i 22). Classic writers use the term in much 
the same manner* Strabo means by it all the region from Lebanon south- 

V. 1-VL UL From the Catt of the first Disciples to the Nomina- 
tion of the Twelve. 

This section presents a symmetrical arrangement, which possibly 
is intentional The call of a leading disciple (I-H) is followed 
by two healings which provoke controversy (12-16, 17-26); and 
then the call of another leading disciple (27-39) k followed 
by two incidents on the sabbath, which again provoke controversy 
(vi 1-5, 6-xx). 

V. 1-LL The call of Simon. In ML tv. 18-22 and Mk. L 
16-20 the narrative is the call of Simon and Andrew, and of James 
and John. Here Andrew is not mentioned. And although all obey 
the call (ver. n), yet Simon alone is addressed (w. 4, 10). But 


the identity of this incident with that narrated by Mt. and Mk can 
neither be affirmed nor denied with certainty. In Mt. and Mk. 
the disciples are fishing ; here they are washing their nets before 
putting them away. The important point is that in all narratives 
those called are at work. Similarly, Levi is called from his busi- 
ness. It would seem as if none of the Twelve were called when 

1. 'Eye^eTo 8 See detached note at the end of ch. L For TOK 
oxXoy see on ri. 29 ; for IP TW TOK o%Kw lirnccio^ai see on iii. 21 ; for 
TOP \6yov TOU Geou see on viii. 1 1 ; for ml introducing the apodosis 
see on iL 21 ; and for ical aflros see on ver. 14. All these points, 
with the analytical fy ^cnxfe (L 7, 10, 20, 21, etc.), are characteristic 
of Lk. Not often do we find so many marks of his style in so 
small a compass. Comp. viiL 22, 37, 40, 41. For the popular 
desire to behold Christ see on iv. 42. With ImMivfai comp. xxii. 
23; Acts xxviL 20; i Cor. ix. i6j Heb. ix. 10; Jos. Ant xx. 5. 3. 
It is used in a literal sense Jn. XL 38, xxi. 9. Here it is mainly 
figurative, but it includes the notion of physical pressure. The 
avros distinguishes Jesus from the o^Xo?: comp. iv. 15, 30. 

xrapa -rt\v XiftnrjK rc^njoraptr. With characteristic accuracy Lk. 
never calls it a sea, while the others never call it a lake. Except 
in Rev. of the "lake of fire," Ai/w^ in N.T. is peculiar to Lk. 
When he uses QdXacrcra, he means sea in the ordinary sense (xviL 
2, 6, xxi 25 1 Acts iv. 24, etc.). 

In AV. of 161 1 both here and Mk. vi. 53 the name appears as " Genesareth," 
following the spelling of the Vulgate ; but in Mt. xiv. 34 as " Genesaret." The 
printers have corrected this to "Gennesaret" in all three places. Tewritrapfr 
is the orthography of the best MSS. in all three places. Josephus writes both 
\lfjuni rw?<raptTtf (Ant. xviii. 2. l) and \lfwri Tepvviff&p (JB. J. iii. 10. 7). 
I Mac. id. 67 we have rb tidap TOU Tewytrdp. But in O.T. the lake is called 
OdXtwcra Sey^pe^ (Num. xxadv. u? ; Josh. xu. 3) from a town of that name near 
to it (Josh, rix, 35). Josephus contrasts its fertility with the barrenness of the 
lower lake in the Jordan valley (B. /. iv. 8. 2) : the one is the "Sea of Life," 
the other the "Sea of Death." See Stanley's fine description of "the most 
sacred sheet of water that this earth contains" (Sin. <Sr* Pal. pp. 368-378); 
Farrar, Life cf Christ, t pp. 175-182; Conder, Z>.A*art "Gennesaret" 

For rapd c. ace. after a verb of rest comp. xvhiu 35 ; Acts z. 6, 32 ; 
Heb. . 12 : Xen. Anab. iii. 5. I, viL 2. 1 1. 

"With 1jv &m& (which is the apodosis of y&ero), Kal eWev is to be joined : 
" It came to pass that He was standing, and He saw." It is very clumsy to 
make xal atrbs fy &mfc parenthetical, and take ical cTScv as the apodosis of 

a. o e i 81 dXects. "But the sea-folk* (<&s) or " fishermen.' 1 It 
is one of many Homeric words which seem to have gone out of 
use and then to have reappeared in late Greek. Fishing in the 
lake has now almost ceased. The Arabs dislike the water. The 
washing of the nets was preparatory to hanging them up to dry. 
As distinct from vwrrw, which is used of washing part of the human 


body, and Xouo>, which is used of washing the whole of it, irXJKw is 
used of washing inanimate objects (Rev. viL 14, xxii. 14; Gen, xlix, 
ii ; Exod. xix. 10). In Lev. xv. n all three words are used with 
exactly this difference of meaning. Trench, Syn, xlv. 

TO, BIKTOOU The most general term for nets of all kinds, of which 
<fywi/3Ai7orpoi> (Mt iv. 18) arid craytjirj (Mt xiiL 47) are special 
varieties. Trench, Syn. bdv.; D.B. art "Net" 

3. cTra^ayaycLK. The correct word for "putting off to sea" 
(2 Mac. xii. 4?; Xen. Helkn. vi. 2. 28): elsewhere in N.T. only 
Mt XXL 1 8 in the sense of "return." For the double preposition 
COmp. 7ravepx/ xat (x. 35, xix. 15) and ivavaTra. (x. 6). Christ 
uses Peter's boat as a pulpit, whence to throw the net of the Gospel 
over His hearers. We have a similar scene Mk. iv. i, and in 
both cases He sits to teach, as in the synagogue at Nazareth* 
Peter was probably steering, and therefore both before and after 
the sermon he is addressed as to the placing of the boat But the 
letting down of the nets required more than one person, and hence 
the change to the plural (xo^ao-ar*). Non statim fromittit Dominus 
capturam: explorat prius obsequia Simonis (Beng.). 

6. 'EirurrtiTa. Lk. alone uses eirLa-rdr^g (viiL 24, 45, ix. 33, 49, 
xviL 13), and always in addresses to Christ He never uses 
"Pa/SySa, which is common in the other Gospels, esp. in Jn., but 
would not be so intelligible to Gentiles, The two words are not 
synonymous, esriaranys implying authority of any kind, and not 
merely that of a teacher. Here it is used of one who has a light 
to give orders. 

Si* 0X179 PUKTOS Kom<crarre$. Through the whole of the best 
time for fishing they had toiled fruitlessly. Only in bibL Grk. has 
iwra> the meaning of "work with much effort, toil wearisomely" 
(xiL 27 ; Acts xx. 35 ; Mt vL 28 ; Josh. xxiv. 13, etc.). TTie 
original meaning is " become exhausted, grow weary " (Jn. iv. 6). 
Clem. Alex, quotas a letter of Epicurus, MT/TC vcos TO iv /tcAAerw 
</>iAocro<^etv, pyre yepcov vvdp^tav jcoflrtara <LXocro<a)V (Strom, iv. 8, 
p. 594, ed. Potter). 

irl 81 TW ^jxaTi aou ^a\d<nt rA, SIKTUO. "But relying upon 
Thy word I will have the nets let down." The "nevertheless" of 
AV. Cran. and Gen. is too strong : for that we should have v\fy 
(VL 24, 35, etc.). For this use of r4 "on the strength o w comp. 
ii 20; Acts iv. 21. Win. xlviii. d, p. 491. The x^"W and 
voi^tTovres show that the x ^ includes the employment of 
others. Excepting ML ii. 4 and 2 Cor. XL 33, x a ^ao> is peculiar to 
Lk. (m. 4, 5 ; Acts ix. 25, xxvil 17, 30). With the iaith involved 
in xaXcucru ra Sucrvct we may compare JccXewrov fit &6v po$ <rJ 
^jri ra vSara (Mt xiv. 28). 

d. crup&Xeurai' TrXi]0o5 Ix^Jur iroXu. Not a miracle of creation, 
but at least of knowledge, even if Christ's will did not bring the 


fish to the spot. In no miracle before the Resurrection does 
Jesus create ; and we have no sufficient reason for believing that 
the food provided at the second miraculous draught of fishes was 
created (Jn. xxi. 9-13). There is no exaggeration, as De Wette 
thinks, in Siepp^'crero or in @utoi<r8cn. (ver. 7). The nets "were 
breaking," i.e. beginning to break, when the help from the other 
boat prevented further mischief, and then both boats were over- 
loaded On the masses of fish to be seen ir the lake see Tristram, 
Nat. Hist, of the Bible, p. 285, and D.Bs p 1074 : "The density 
of the shoals of fish in the Lake of Galilee can scarcely be con- 
ceived by those who have not witnessed them. They sometimes 
cover an acre or more on the surface in one dense mass." 

The form jh}<r<rw occurs in poetry (Horn. //. xviii, 571, xxiv. 454) and late 
prose (Strab. XL 14, 8). It is a collat. form of frtyvv/u (Veitch, s.v, 9 and 
Curtius, Etym. 511, 66 1 ) : but see on uc. 42. 

7. KaT^uoui> TOIS fwrfyois. Possibly because they were too 
far off for a call to be heard. The other boat was still dose to the 
shore (ver. 2), for Simon alone had been told to put out into deep 
water. The verb is freq. in Horn,, and occurs in Hdt and Plato, 
generally in the sense of "nod assent, grant " Here only in N.T. 
Euthymius suggests that they were too agitated to call 

Here and Heb. i. 9 (from Ps. xliv. 8) we have ju^roxor as a subst. Comp. 
Heb. in. i, 14, vi, 4, xii. 8: and see T. S. Evans on i Cor. x* 16-18 in 
Speaker's Com. " As distinguished from Kowwvfo (ver. 10 ; Heb. x. 33), which 
suggests the idea of personal fellowship, ptroxos descnbes participation in 
some common blessing or privilege, or the like. The bond of union lies in 
that which is shared and not in the persons themselves " (Wsctt, on Heb. 
lii. i). For <nXXa{U<r0ai in the sense of "assist" comp. Phil. iv. 3. In 
class. Grk. the act is more common in this sense. For ^jXOav see on i. 59. 

dft^oVcpa rb, irXoia o5ore Pu0ieor0ai afird. For ezrXijcrav 
see on i. 15; a/A^orepot is another favourite word (i 6, 7, vi. 39, 
vil 42 ; Acts viii. 38, x 16, xxiil 8) ; not in Mk. or Jn. "They 
filled both the boats, so that they began to sink " : comp. Stepprfo-tro. 
The act. is used 2 Mac. xii. 4 of the sinking of persons ; by Poly- 
bius (ii, 10. 5) of the sinking of ships; and i Tim, vi. 9 of sending 
down to perdition. Nowhere else in N.T. 

8. !tji,o)i> Flerpos Trpoaeirecrcf rots yoVaoiK 'Irjorou. This IS the 
only place in his Gospel in which Lk. gives Peter both names, 
and it is the first mention of the surname : see on vL 14. 

The constr. irfxxnrtirreaf rots yov. is quite classical (Eur. Or. 1332 j comp. 
Mk. vii. 25 ; Soph. O. C. 1606) ; often with dat. of pers. (viii. 28, 47 ; Acti 
xvl 29; Mk.iiL n, v. 33). 

dir* ifxou. Not c< Leave my boat," which is too definite* 
but, " Go out of my vicinity, Depart from me" See on iv. 35. 


It is quite erroneous to introduce here the notion that sailors 
believe it to be unlucky to have a criminal on board (Cic. De Nat 
Deor. lii. 37. 89; Hor. Carm. iii. 2. 26). In that case Peter, like 
Jonah, would have asked to be thrown into the sea. That the 
Twelve, before their call, were exceptionally wicked, vrrlp iravav 
a/juipriav avofiwrepovs (Barn. v. 9), is unscriptural and incredible 
But Origin seems to accept it (Con. Cels. \. 63; comp. Jerome, 
Adv. Pelag* iiL 2). See Schanz, ad loc. p. 198. 

Peter does not regard himself as a criminal, but as a sinful man ; and this 
miracle has brought home to him a new sense, both of his own sinfiilness and of 
Christ's holiness. It is not that he fears that Christ's holiness is dangerous to a 
sinner (B. Weiss), but that the contrast between the two is felt to be so intense 
as to be intolerable. The presence of the sinless One is a reproach and a con- 
demnation, rather than a peril ; and therefore such cases as those of Gideon and 
Manoah (Judg. vi. 22, xui. 22), ated by Grotius and De Wette, are not quite 
parallel. Job (xlii. 5, 6) is a better illustration ; and Beng. compares the 
centurion (Mt. viii. 8). The objection that Peter had witnessed the healing of 
his wife's mother and other miracles, and therefore could not be so awestruck 
by this miracle, is baseless. It frequently happens that one experience touches 
the heart, after many that were similar to it have failed to do so. Perhaps, 
without being felt, they prepare the way. Moreover, this was a miracle m 
Peter's own craft, and therefore was likely to make a special impression on 
him ; just as the healing of a disease, known to the profession as incurable, 
would specially impress a physician. 

Krfpi. The change from rrrara (see on ver. 5) is remarkable, 
and quite in harmony with the change of circumstances. It is the 
" Master" whose orders must be obeyed, the "Lord" whose holi- 
ness causes moral agony to the sinner (Dan, x. 16). Grotius, 
followed by Trench, points out that the dominion over all nature, 
including "the fish of the sea, and whatsoever passeth through 
the paths of the seas " (Ps. viii 8), lost by Adam, is restored in 
Christ, the ideal man and the second Adam. But that Peter 
recognized this is more than we know. In what follows notice the 
characteristic ^ravras and <rvv. 

9. em T7j aypa r&v tyQfav. This was the Ifasis of their amaze- 
ment : see small print on ii. 33, and comp. Acts xiv. 3 and Rom. 
v. 14. There is no need to make aypa act in ver. 4, "a catching," 
and pass, here, "the tfying caught" "For a catch" in ver. 4; 
"at the catch of fish" here. If &> (rvv&afiov (BDX, Goth.) is 
the true reading, both may be act But if ij <rweXa/?oK is right, 
then in both places aypa is pass. In either case we have the 
idiomatic attraction of the relative which is so freq. in Lk. See 
small print on iii. 19. The word is common in poetry both act. 
and pass. Not in LXX, nor elsewhere in N.T. Note the change 
of meaning from o-uXkajSta-Oai in ver. 7 to cw&apov. The verb 
is freq. in Lk., but elsewhere rare in N.T. 

10* 'IffcujBof Kal 'iwdvTji'. The first mention of them by Lk. 


In ML and Mk. they were in their boat, mending their nets, when 
Jesus called them; and Mt. adds that Zebedee was with them, 
which Mk. implies (i 20). For KOLPWOI see on ver. 7. Are they 
the same as the Atera^oe? It is possible that Peter had his KOWVWOI 
in his boat, while the /xen>xoi were in the other boat. In any case 
the difference of word should be preseived in translation. This 
Tyn. Cran. and Gen. effect, with "fellows" for /*cn>xoi and 
"partners" for KOIVWVOI. But Vulg, and Beza have socii for both; 
and RV. follows AV. with "partners" for both. 

etirev irpos -&v IifMaw 'tyaous. It is still Peter who is singled 
out for notice. Yet some critics affirm that it is the tendency of 
this Evangelist to depreciate Peter. For pf) <J>o|3ou see on I 13: 
excepting ML v. 36 and Rev. i. 17, Lk. alone uses the expres- 
sion without an accusative. Peter's sense of unworthiness was in 
itself a reason for courage. Quo magis sibi displicebat hoc magis 
Domino placet (Grotius). 

dnr TOO HUK. The present moment is a crisis in his life, of 
which he was reminded at the second miraculous draught of fishes, 
when the commission given to him now was restored to him after 
his fall Excepting 2 Cor. v. 16 and [Jn. viii. n], d row vw is 
peculiar to LL (L 48, xiL 52, xxii. 18, 69 ; Acts xviii. 6). Comp, 
ecus row vvv (ML xxiv. 21 ; Mk. xiiL 19) and a^pi TOT) vw (Rom. viii 
22 ; Phil. i. 5). 

di>6p<6irous Icrjj Jwypwv. Both substantive and verb have special 
point (?nen instead of fish ; for life instead of for death) ; while the 
analytical tense marks the permanence of the new pursuit : comp. 
i. 20. This last is preserved in Rhem. " shalt be taking," follow- 
ing Vulg. ens capiens. Beza seems to be alone in giving the full 
force of o>ypaiy (<uos and aypcTv) : wvos eapies homines. But to add 
"alive" in English deprives "men" of the necessary emphasis. 1 
The verb is used of sparing the lives of those taken in battle: 
yp, 'Arpeos vt^ <rv 8* o&a S(u Saroiva. (Horn. IL vi. 46). Else- 
where in N.T only 2 Tim. iL 26, of the evil one. Comp. the 
exhortation of Socrates to Critobulus : 'AAAa tiappw Tr&pu dya^os 
y/yveon0ai, ical rotovros ytyvJ^tCFOs ^iypav cTr^cipei roi? KaXovs TC 
/cdya^ow (Xen. Mem. ii. 6. 28). 

11* KaTayay<5rrcs rd irXoicu Like CTravayayetv in ver. 3, this is 
a nautical expression; freq. in Acts (ix. 30, xxii. 30, xxiii. 15, 20, 
etc.). Comp. dv<jiyv, viiL 22. 

d^^rres irdmra ^KoXoJ6t](raK a^T. Even the large draught ol 
fishes does not detain them. They are sure that He who has 
given them such marvellous returns from their usual business will 
be ready to provide for them when, at His summons, they abandon 

*Cod. Brix. has hominum entis captor es^ including James and John, 
although noli timere precedes. D has vorfa-ta yip -UJJULS dAicw d.v6p6rw (from 
Mt. and Mk.} after the insertion ^ yLveff&e dXtew fy 


their business. The call was addressed to Peter (ver. 10), but the 
sons of Zebedee recognize that it concerns them also ; and they 
leave and follow. 

In this late Greek &<f>lyfu is preferred to Xbrc* and its compounds, and 
d*roAov0& to &n>juat (which does not occur in N.T.) and its compounds. 

The feet that other disciples besides Peter obeyed the call and followed 
Jesus, is the main reason for identifying this narrative with Mk. i. 16-20 and 
Mt iv. 18-22. All three have the important word d^zres, and Mt and Lk. 
have 'fiKo\otidi)<rav atfr<, for which Mk. has dirij\dojf dirtcrov aurov. But note 
that Lk. alone has his favourite rd^ra after &$4rres (comp. vi. 30, vii. 35, 
ix. 43, xi. 4, xii. 10). Against these similarities, however, we have to set the 
differences, chief among which is the miraculous draught of fishes, which Mt. 
and Mk. omit. Could Peter have failed to include this in his narrative ? And 
would Mk. have omitted it, if the Petrine tradition had contained it? It is 
easier to believe that some of the disciples were called more than once, and that 
their abandonment of their original mode of life was gradual : so that Mk. and 
Mt. may relate one occasion and Lk. another. Even after the Resurrection 
Peter speaks quite naturally of " going a fishing " (Jn. xxL 3), as if it was still at 
least an occasional pursuit. But we must be content to remain in doubt as to 
the relation of this narrative to that of Mk. and Mt See Weiss, Leben Jesu, 
I. iii. 4, Eng. tr. ii. pp. 54-59- 

This uncertainty, however, need not be extended to the relation of this 
miracle to that recorded in Jn. xxi. 1-14. It cannot be accepted as probable 
that, in the source from which Lk. drew, " the narrative of the call of reter has 
been confused with that of his reinstatement in the office which had been 
entrusted to him, and so the history of the miraculous draught of fishes which is 
connected with the one has been united with the other." The contrast between 
all the main features of the two mnacles is too great to be explained by^ confused 
recollection, i. There Jesus is not recognized at first; here He is known 
directly He approaches. 2. There He is on the shore ; here He is in Peter's 
boat. 3. There Peter and John are together ; here they seem to be in different 
boats. 4. There Peter leaves the capture of the fish to others ; here he is chief 
actor in it 5. There the net is not broken ; here it is. 6. There the fish are 
caught close to the shore and brought to the shore ; here they are caught in 
deep water and are taken into the boats. 7. There Peter rushes through the 
water to the Lord whom he had lately denied ; here, though he had committed 
no such sin, he says, "Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord." 
Theie is nothing improbable in two miracles of a similar kind, one granted to 
emphasize and illustrate the call, the other the re-call, of the chief Apostle, 

The way in which the Fathers allegorize the two miracles is well known, the 
first of the Church Militant, the second of the Church ^Triumphant R. A. 
Lapsius would have it that the first is an allegory of quite another kind, the 
main point of which is the ftfroxpi in the other boat He assumes that James 
and John are in Peter's boat, and explains thus. That Christ first teaches and 
then suddenly speaks of fishing, tells us that the fishing is symbolical. The 
fishing in deep water is the mission to the heathen, which Peter at first is 
unwilling (?) to undertake (comp. Acts x. 14). The marvellous draught after the 
night of fruitless toil is the conversion of many heathen after the failure of the 
mission to the Jews. This work is so great that Peter with the two other 
Apostles of the Jews are unequal to it, and have to call Paul, Barnabas, and 
others to help them. Peter then recognizes his former unwillingness (?) as a 
sin, and both he and the sons of Zebedee are amazed at the success of the 
mission to the heathen (Gal. ii. 9). Thus the rejection of Jesus by the people 
of Nazareth (iv. 29, 30), and His preaching " to the other cities also " (iv. 43), 
teach the same lesson as the miraculous draught ; vie. the failure of the mission 


to the Jews and the success of the mission to the heathen (Jahrb. fur prot> 
TheoL 1875, i p. 189). The whole is exceedingly forced, and an examination 
of the details snows that they do not fit. If the common view is correct, that 
James and John were the /^ro^ot in the other boat, the whole structure falls to 
the ground. Had Lk. intended to convey the meaning read into the narrative 
by Lipsius, be would not have left the point on which the whole is based so 
open to misconception, Keim on the whole agrees with Lipsius, and dog- 
matically asserts that "the artificial narrative of Lk. must unhesitatingly be 
abandoned ... It is full of subtle and ingenious invention , . . Its historical 
character collapses under the weight of so much that is artificial " (Jes. of Naz. ni. 
pp. 264, 265). Holtzmann also pronounces it to be " legendary and consciously 
aflegoncai n (in loco). Does Peter's apparently inconsistent conduct, beseeching 
Jesus to depart and yet abiding at His feet, look like invention ? 

12-16. The Healing of a Leper. Here we certainly have an 
incident which is recorded by all three Evangelists. The amount 
of verbal agreement is very great, and we may confidently affirm 
that all three make use of common material Mt (viii. 1-4) is the 
most brief, Mk. (i. 40-45) the most full ; but Mt is the only one 
who gives any note of time. He places the miracle just after Jesus 
had come down from delivering the Sermon on the Mount. 

On the subject of Leprosy see H. V. Carter, Leprosy and 
Elephantiasis, 1874; Tilbury Fox, Skin Diseases, 1877; Kaposi, 
Hautkrankheiten, Wien, 1880 ; and the literature given at the end of 
art Aussate in Herzog ; also in Hirsch, Handb. d. Pathologic, 1860. 

12. Kal tSorf. Hebraistic ; in Mt viii. 2, but not in ML i. 40 : 
the /cat is the apodosis to eyepero, as in ver. i. No verb follows 
the i&W f as if the presence of the leper were a surprise. Had the 
man disregarded the law in approaching the crowd? Or had the 
people come upon him suddenly, before he could avoid them ? 
What follows shows a third possibility. 

irXiJpTjs X^rrpas. This particular is given only by the beloved 
physician. His face and hands would be covered with ulcers and 
sores, so that everyone could see that the hideous disease was at 
a very advanced stage. This perhaps accounts for the man's 
venturing into the multitude, and for their not fleeing at his 
approach; for by a strange provision of the law, "if the leprosy 
break out abroad in the skin, and the leprosy cover all the skin of 
him that hath the plague, from his head even to his feet, . . . then 
the priest . . * shall pronounce him clean that hath the plague " 
(Lev. xiii. 12, 13). 

cSc^&j aurou. Excepting Mt ix, 38, the verb is peculiar in 
N.T. to Lk. and Paul It is especially freq. in Lk. (viii. 28, 38, 
ix. 38, 40, x. 2, etc.). In LXX it represents a variety of Hebrew 
words, and is very common. Here Mk. has irapaKaX&v. 

l&v fl&Tjs, Srfraom ft Ka0apiW. All three accounts have these 
words, and the reply to them, \.o>, KaBapMrfri, without variation. 
The Swcwrai is evidence of strong faith in the Divine power of 
Jesus ; for leprosy was believed to be incurable by human means* 


It was " the stroke " of God, and could not be removed by the 
hand of man. But it is characteristic of the man's imperfect 
apprehension of Christ's character, that he has more trust in His 
power than in His goodness. He doubts the will to heal He 
says KaQapfocu rather than fapaireva-ai or tcurao-0ai because of the 
pollution which leprosy involved (Lev. xiiL 45, 46). In O.T. 
"unclean" and "clean," not "sick" and "healed," are the terms 
used about the leper. The old rationalistic explanation, that 
KaOapLvai means "to pronounce clean," and that the man was 
already cured, but wanted the great Rabbi of Nazareth to absolve 
him from the expensive and troublesome journey to Jerusalem, 
contradicts the plain statements of the Gospels. He was "full of 
leprosy" (Lk.); "immediately the leprosy departed from him" 
(Mk. Lk.). If KaOapto-ai means "to pronounce clean," then 
KaQapi<r9r)Ti means " be thou pronounced clean." Yet Jesus sends 
him to the priest (Lk. Mk. Mt). Contrast the commands of 
Christ with the prayers of Moses, Elijah, and Elisha, when they 

13. lin^as TTJV x^P*- AH three have this Hebraistic ampli- 
fication. In LXX the phrase commonly occurs in connexion 
with an act of punishment: Ex. viL 5, 19, viii. i, 2, ix. 22, 23, 
x. 12, 21, 22, xiv. 16, 21, 26, 27; Ezek. vi 14, xiv. 9, xvL 27, 
xxv. 7, 13, 16, xxxv. 3; ZepL L 4, iL 13; Jer. vL 12, xv. 6. In 
N.T. it rarely has this meaning. Jesus touched the leper on the 
same principle as that on which He healed on the sabbath : the 
ceremonial law gives place to the law of charity when the two 
come into collision. His touch aided the leper's faith. 

TJ Xirpa &irijX0i> dir* auToG. Here again (see on iv. 40) Mk. 
has the whole expression, of which Lk. and Mt each use a part 

Mk. has cwn}X0v oaf avrov fj Xrpo, KOLL eKaQapicrOr], and Mt. has 
Ka6apLa-Orj avrov 17 A.rpa. All three have ev0o>s or v&vs 9 showing 
that Jesus not merely prepared the way for a cure which nature 
accomplished, but healed the leper at once by His touch. 

14. ica! auTo$. LL's favourite form of connexion in narrative : 
00- i> i7 37* i- *7> 22 > 2 8 Hi. 23, iv. 15, vL 20, eta 

irap^YY l ^v. The word is specially nsed of cominander& 
whose orders are passed along the line (?rapa), and is freq. in Lk. 
(viiL 29, 56, ix. 21 ; Acts L 4, iv. 18, v. 28, 40, x. 42, etc.); rare 
in Mt (x. 5, xv. 35) and Mk. (vL 8, viii 6) ; not in Jn. All the 
others use evreXXeo-^ai, and Mt KeXe&tv, botii of which are rare in 
Lk. Here Mt and Mk. have Xeyo. 

p,t]Bc^l etirciK. The charge was given with emphasis (3p 
/nyScvl fjiySfv t7n;s) and sternness (l/^pi/iTyo-4/xcvosX as Mk. tdls 
us. The meaning of it is variously explained. To prevent (i) the 
man from having intercourse with others before being pronounced 
dean by proper authority; (2) the man from becoming proud 


through frequent telling of the amazing benefit bestowed upon 
him ; (3) the priests from hearing of the miracle before the man 
arrived, and then deciding, out of hostility to Jesus, to deny the 
cure; (4) the people from becoming unhealthily excited about 
so great a miracle. Chrysostom and Euthymius suggest (5) that 
Christ was setting an example of humility, StSao-Kwv TO d/co/wraorov 
/cat d^iXoriftov, in forbidding the leper to proclaim His good deeds. 
Least probable of all is the supposition (6) that " our Lord desired 
to avoid the Levitical rites for uncleanness which the unspiritual 
ceremonialism of the Pharisees might have tried to force upon 
Him " for having touched the leper. The first of these was prob- 
ably the chief mason ; but one or more of the others may be true 
also. The man would be likely to think that one who had been 
so miraculously cured was not bound by ordinary rules ; and if he 
mi-ad freely with others before he was declared by competent 
authority to be clean, he would give a handle to Christ's enemies, 
who accused Him of breaking the law. In the Sermon on the 
Mount He had said, " Think not that I came to destroy the law 
or the prophets" (Mt. v. 17); which implies that this had been 
said of Him. The command j^Sevt /^Sev ctTnys is further evidence 
that Jesus did not regard miracles as His chief credentials. And 
there are many such commands (viii. 56; Mt. ix. 30, xii 16; 
ML i. 34, iii. 12, v. 43, viL 36, viii. 26). 

dXAa drtXd&p $ov ffcavrbv T$ lepet. Sudden changes to the oratio 
dtrecta are common after ira/xryyAXw and similar verbs (Acts L 4, acxiii. 22 ; 
Mk. vi. 8, 9 ; comp. Acts xvu. 3 ; Tobit viu. 21 ; Xen. Andb. i 3. 16, 20). 
\Vm, kiiL 2, p. 725. 

TW tepeu As in the original (Lev. xiii. 49), the sing, refers to 
the priest who was on duty at the time. Note the /ea&6s, "exactly 
as " : the reference is to Lev. xiv. 4-10, which enjoins rather ex- 
pensive offerings. Comp. Mt i. 24. For the form Mowcnjs see 
on iL 22. This charge is in all three narratives almost in the 
same words. On its import see Hort, Judaistic Christianity ', p. 30. 

jcaCapurjxou. Emundatio (Vulg.), mundatio (fq) purgatio (a), 
punjicatio (d). 

eis jtapTupiov afirois. This addition is in all three, and various 
explanations have been suggested. That (i) the priests may be 
convinced of My Divine power ; (2) the priests may see that I do 
not disregard the Law ; (3) the people may be convinced that the 
cure is complete, and that the leper may be readmitted to society; 
(4) the people may see that I do not disregard the Law. It is the 
sacrifice which is the p.a.pr6piov 9 and therefore the second or fourth 
explanation is to be preferred Both may be right 1 

1 " It is worthy of notice, that all the places where our Lord is stated to 
have met with lepers are in the central districts of Samaria and Galilee* . . , It 


15. ^pxero 8c jxaXXoy 6 Xfyos ircpl adrou. Lk. does not state, 
as Mk. does, that this was owing to the man's disobedience. Mt 
omits both points. This use of Step^o/tai of the spreading of a 
report is quite classical (Thuc. vi 46. 5 ; Xen. Anab. L 4. 7). The 
word is a favourite one with Lk ; see on ii. 15. The ^SAAov 
means "more than before, more than ever" (Jn. v. 18, xix. 8), 
or "all the more," because of the command not to tell (xviii, 39 ; 
Acts v. 14, ix. 22, xxii 2). 

(ruj^pxorro ox^ot iroXXol djcoJctp ical flcpaircifeardai, dirfc TW d<r- 
Ocmwv. For miracles mentioned as being numerous, but without 
details, comp. iv. 40, vL 18, vii. 21. The constr. Oepa-rreueo-Gai foro" 
is peculiar to Lk. (viL 21, viiL 2). The usual constr. with 0ep. 
is the ace. (iv. 23, 40, ix. i, etc.). For &&Qevew comp. TiiL 2, xiii, 
n, 12 ; Acts xxviiL 9; Heb. XL 34, where we have a similar 
constr., cSwafjitoOrjcrcLV airo d<r0o>tas. 

16. CLUTOS Se T)K U7TO)((jpa)v iv rats epiqjxois Kal irpocreuxofievos. 
The verse forms one of those resting-places with which Lk. fre- 
quently ends a narrative (i. 80, ii. 20, 40, 52, iii. 18-20, iv. 13, 15, 
30, 44). " But He " on His part, in contrast to the multitudes 
who came to see Him, " was in retirement in the deserts, and in 
prayer." See on iii. 21. The analytical tense expresses what 
Jesus was engaged in while the multitudes were seeking Him. 
That they were unable to find Him is not implied here, and ML 
states the opposite. For the afir<5s comp. iv. 30, vL 8, viiL 37, 54, 
xi. 17, 28, xxiiL 9; and for fiirox^pci^, ix. 10. The verb occurs 
nowhere else in N.T., but is freq. in class. Grk. Lk. alone uses 
the plur. of Ip^o? (i. 80, viii 29). See Bede, ad loc. 

For & after a verb of motion, to express the rest which is the result of the 
motion, comp. Mt. xiv. 3 ; Jn. iii. 35 ; 2 Cor. viii. 16. Such condensed 
constructions are not common, of found at all, in earlier writers. The con- 
verse use of els after verbs of rest is more common (zL 7, xxi. 37 j Acts ii 39, 
vii. 4, viii. 20, 23, 40, etc.). Win. L 4. a, p. 514. 

17-S6. The Healing of a Paralytic. Mt ix. 1-8 ; Mk. ii. i-i*. 
We again have a narrative which is narrated by all three Synoptists 
in a way which shows that they are using common material. Mt. 
is again the most brief. Mk, and Lk. agree in the details, but 
differ considerably in the wording. Different translations of the 
same Aramaic original, or of two very similar Aramaic originals, 
would account for these similarities and differences. The cast of 
the opening verse is very Hebraistic, as is shown by lyeyero, by 
Iv /uoi Tfiv ^jacpwv, by /cat aftros, and by Swo/us JLvpiov fy eis. See 
on iv. 36 and on viiL 22. The & pt$ rQv ^/lepow is an absolutely 
indefinite expression, which we have no right to limit. Mt. and 
Mk. give no date. The phrase Iv fu rwvis peculiar to Lk. 

is just in this district that to this day we find the colonies of lepers 
numerous n (Tristram, Eastern Customs in Bible Lands^ p. 19). 


17. *aptorcuot. The first mention of them by Lk., who assumes 
thit his readers know who the Pharisees were. This introduction 
of them stamps them as hostile to Christ ; and we have here the 
first collision in Galilee between Jesus and the authorities at 
Jerusalem. On the Pharisees see Jos. Ant. xiii. 5. 9, x. 6, xviL 2. 
4, xv iii. r. 2, 3 ; B.J* ii. 8. 14; Schurer, y^/r^ People, II. ii. 26, 
p 10 ; Hausrath, Jv.T. Times, L p. 135; Keim,^. of Naz. L p. 
321 ; Edersh. L. <5f* T. i. pp 96, 97, 310-324. 

yojxoSiS&rKaXoi. The word is formed on the analogy of fepoSiSao-- 
KoXo9 and xopoSiSacrKoAos, but is not classical. Elsewhere only 
Acts v. 34 and i Tim. i. 7. In all three cases teachers of the 
Jewish Law are meant, and the term is almost a synonym for oi 
ypa/i/zarctV in the N.T. sense. That they had come IK irrfo-ijs KcSpjs 
nJ9 TaXtXaias KO! *!ou$aia$ is, of course, a popular hyperbolical 
expression, and illustrates Lk.'s fondness for *$: comp. vi 17, 

Syyajus Kupiou TJ>> els TO ia<r0cu auToc. "The power of Jehovah 
was present for Him to heal with " ; *.*. for Jesus to employ in 
working miracles of healing. See on iv. 36 and comp. i. 35, xxiv. 
49 ; Acts vL 8. Hence miracles are often called Swa/ieis, or out- 
comes of the power of God. Trench, Syn. xci. The failure to 
see that avrov is the subject, not the object, of ta<r#ai produced 
the corrupt reading avrovs (A C D and versions). This corrupt 
reading produced the erroneous interpretation of Kv/otov as mean- 
ing Christ Lk. often calls Christ " the Lord " ; but in such cases 
Kvpios always has the article (vii. 13, x. i, xi. 39, xii. 42, xiii. 15, 
xviL 5, 6, xviii. 6, xix. 8, xxii. 61). * Kvpios without the article 
means Jehovah (i. ii, iL 9, iv. 18; Acts v. 19, viii. 26, 39, xii. 7). 
This verse shows us Jesus armed with Divine power and con- 
fronted by a large body of hostile spies and critics. What follows 
(w* 19, 26) proves that there was also a multitude of curious 
spectators, who had not declared for either side, like the multitude 
round Elijah and the prophets of Baal on Carmel (i Kings xviii. 

Except in quotations from LXX (Mt xiii. 15 ; Jn. xiL 40} and one other 
passage (Jn. iv. 47), tiurftu with act sigmf. is peculiar to Lk. (vi. 19, ix. 2, 
II, 42, aav. 4, xxiL 51 ; Actsix. 34, x. 38, etc.). 

18. o? rjv irapaXeXuft^Kos. "Here and wherever St Luke men- 
tions this disease, he employs the verb irapaXvea-Oai, and never 
The other N.T. writers use the popular form irapa- 
and never use the verb, the apparent exception to this, 

Heb. xii. 12, being a quotation from the LXX, Is. xxxv. 3. St 
Luke's use is in strict agreement with that of the medical writers" 
(Hobart, Med. Lang, of St. Lk. p. 6). 

cj^roui* aurov elore^yKciv. Into the house, although it has not 
yet been stated that Jesus <?a$ in a house. ML tells us that thera 


were four bearers, and that the place was thronged even about the 
door. For IwSmoy see small print on L 15. 

19. For ju/jj with a participle expressing a reason sec small print on iii. 9. 
With volas understand 6Sov and comp. ^Ketmjs (xix. 4). Here we should 

have expected &t, which some inferior MSS. insert in both places. "By 
what kind of a way " emphasizes their perplexity. For the omission of 
comp. iii. 5. Win. xxx. n, lnv. 5, pp. 258, 738. The classical r^v 
illustrates this common ellipse. 

8i& TO> oxXop. " Because of the multitude * ; not u through the 
multitude," a meaning of 8 <r. ace. which is found only in poetry 
and freq. in Horn. It was probably by means of outside steps 
that they "went up on to the top of the house." Oriental houses 
sometimes have such steps; and in any case .adders could be 
used. That the Swjjia was a dwelling-house is not stated. In bibL 
Grk. it means a roof rather than a house (Deut xxii 8 ; Josh. ii. 
6, 8), and in N.T. seems to imply a flat roof (xii. 3, xvii 31 ; Acts 
x. 9 ; Mk. xiiL 15 ; Mt. x. 27, xxiv. 17). It may have been over 
a large hall on the ground floor. Even if Jesus was teaching in 
the upper room of a dwelling-house (and the Rabbis often taught 
there), the difficulty of getting on to the roof and removing a small 
portion of it would not be very great Edersh. Hist ofj. JV. p. 253. 

Stct r&v Mpdjuw itaftjicaK. The verb is peculiar to Lk. in N.T. 
(Acts ix. 25, x. ii, xL 5); freq. in class. Grk. Mk. has cwrforey- 
acrav TTJV crreyiTV oVov rjv, Kal fopvavTs "xcXvtriv. We need not 
infer from c^opv'&zrrcs that under the tiles was day or mortar to be 
"dug otiu" But, it there was anything of the kind to be cut 
through and removed, this could easily be done without serious 
consequences to those who were in the crowded room below. 
Men who had so much at stake, and who had got thus far, would 
not desist through fear of sprinkling a few persons with rubbish. 
To make these difficulties, which are very unsubstantial, a reason 
for rejecting the whole narrative as a legend, is rather childish 
criticism. The constructor of a legend would not have made his 
details conspicuously incredible. The suggestion that Jesus was 
in a gallery outside the house, teaching the multitude in the open 
court below, is not helpful. In that case, why unroof the gallery? 
The sick man might have been let down to the front of it Need- 
less difficulty b ag been made about rather a simple matter * 

CT&F TW ftXwSitt. Lk. alone has his favourite o-tfv. The sub- 
stantive occurs here only. It is the dim, of jtXiviy (viii 16, xvii* 
34), and perhaps means here a portion of the KXlvrj mentioned in 
ver. 1 8. Not all of what had been used to bring him through the 
streets would be let down through the root Comp. jcAtvaptoy 
(Acts v 15). Double forms of diminutives are not uncommon: 
' For another explanation see Tristram, EasUm Custom** pp. 34, 35. 


and ywaiicctpiov (2 Tim. iii. 6) ; ffatSiov (5. 59, 66) 
and iratSapiov (Jn. VI. 9) ; aru/a/aov and mva/a'Siov (i. 63 J. Mk. has 
the inelegant KpajSarros, grabatus (Acts v. 15, ix. 33), for which 
the Greeks preferred <r/ctfwrov$ or o-Kt^iroStov. 

20* !8tt>H T^P monK afowK. The faith of the man and of those 
who brought him. All three accounts have the words ; but Mt 
omits the persev ering energy which proved how strong their faith 
was. We need not assume that the paralytic himself did not share 
his friends* confidence. 

For ft full discussion of ths Meaning of *' Faith w in the New Testament and 
in some Jewish Writings see detached note on Rom. i. 17. Here it will suffice 
to point out its four main uses for (I) belief in God ; (2) belief in His promises ; 
(3) oelief in Chnat ; (4; beluf in some particular utterance or claim of God or of 
Christ. Of these four the last is the commonest use in the Synoptic Goipels, 
where it generally mean*; belief m the power of Christ, or of God m Chnst, to 
work miracles. The efficacy of Christ's power is commonly dependent upon 
the faith of those who are to be benefited! by its exc k rcise, as here. Comp. vii. 
50, viiL 48, xvn. 19, xviii. 42. By an easy tiansition this faith in the power of 
<"!od or of Chi i*t to uork miracles becomes used of the conviction that the 
believer himself has recened power to work miracles. Comp. xvii. 6. In 
\\ iii. 8 the faith to be found on earth means faith in the Son of Man. 

d$Q>iTcu <roi at afxapriai crou. Mk. has rc/cvov, and 
ML has 0aperi r&vov. It is not likely that Lk., the writer of the 
Gospel of grace for all, has deliberately changed the more tender 
address, because it seemed to be unsuitable to one who must, as 
he thinks, have been a grievous sinner. Comp. xii. 14 and xxii, 
57. And we affirm more than we know, if we say that this absolu- 
tion was necessary for the man's cure, because otherwise he would 
not have be-ieved that Jesus could heal him, and his faith was 
essential to the cure. Tie probably believed, and perhaps knew, 
that his malady was the direct consequence of his own sin (xiii. 2 ; 
Jn. v. 14, ix. 2 ; r Cor. xi. 30). But it does not follow from this 
that faith on his part was thus far absent, 

Suidas seems to be nght in regarding afoawu as a Doric form of the 
peri indie, for d^ewrai. But it was admitted rather freely, even by Attic 
writers. Comp. dvfovrat (Ildt. 11. 165, I ; but the reading is not certain) 
and tfada. from #?w (iv. 6). \Vm. xiv. 3. a, p. 96 ; Veitch, J. v. In Mt. and 
Mk. the true reading here is d^ewat : but dfouvrai occurs again vii. 47, 48 ; 
I John ii. 12, and probably Jn. xx. 23. Some have regaided it as a sub- 
junctive : r&tnssa sunto. Fntzsche (on Mt ix, 2) pertinently asks, Quo usu 
out more subjunetivum m tahbus locts absolute positum defendas? 

L tjpgairo StaXoY^ecrOai. Not a mere periphrasis for 8ieAoy 
ourro: see on iv. 21. Hitherto they had found nothing in His 
words to excite criticism. Here they seemed to see the oppor- 
tunity for which they had been watching, and their discussions 
forthwith began. 1 The ypajijwrrets are evidently the same a? the 

1 It has been suggested that foav jca^^e^ot (Mk. iL 6) and ijpfavro ( 

ere are simply different translations of the Aiamaic verb, which LAS 


in ver. 17, Neither Mt. nor Mk. mention the 
Pharisees here ; and both of them imply that the criticisms were 
not uttered aloud : fr 4aurots (ML), fr rats jcapoYaw (Mk.). Even 
here utterance is not stated, for Aeyovrcs may be used of thoughts 
(xii. 17; ML xri. 25). 

Tis corn' OUTOS 05 XaXci |3Xaa<|>irifuas ; An accidental iambic line. 
We have another ver. 39, if cvfle'ws be admitted as genuine. The 
ovros is contemptuous, as often (iv, 22, vii. 39, 49, ix. 9, xiv. 30, 
xv. 2, etc.). In N.T., as in class. Grk., /Shoo-fopta has the two 
meanings of "evil speaking" (Col. iii. 8; Eph. iv. 31; i Tim. vi 4; 
Jude 9 : comp. Rom. ill 8, xiv. 16) and "blasphemy" (ML xil 31, 
xxvi. 65; Rev. xiii. 6). These cavillers assume that Jesus has 
claimed to have pardoned the man on His own authority, not 
merely to have said that He knew that his sins have been forgiven 
by God. And Jesus does not say that they are mistaken in this. 
He acts on His own authority in accordance with the will of the 
Father, doing on earth what the Father does in heaven (Jn. v. 19, 
21). For a<t>ti/at of sins comp. ML xiL 31; Mk. iii 28; Rom. 
iv. 7, etc. 

22. eiriyi'ous B 6 'hprous rods SiaXoyiajxoDs afirup. The com- 
pound verb implies thorough and accurate knowledge (i Cor. 
xiii. 12; Rom. i. 32; Justin, Try. iii. p. 221 A). The subsL M> 
ywms is used of " the knowledge of God and of Christ as being the 
perfection of knowledge: e.g. Prov. ii. 5; Hos. iv. i, vi 6; Eph. 
i. 17, iv. 13; 2 Pet. L i, 2, 8, ii. 20; Clem. Alex. Pad. ii. i, p. 173* 
(Lft. on Col. L 9). Comp. the climax in Afost Const, vii. 39. i, 
yvoxris, cTtyvcoeriSj Tr\7jpo<t>opia. On both eTrryvoxns and SioAoywr- 
JJLOVS see Hatch, BibL Grk. p. 8. The latter seems here to mean 
"thoughts" (evO-vjjLrjorsis, ML ix. 4) rather than " discussions w 
(ix. 46). In LXX it is used of the counsels of God (Ps. xxxix. 6, 

xci. 6). It is, however, more often used in a bad sense (Ps. Iv. 5, 
xciii. ii, cxlv. 4, etc.), and is specially freq. in Lk. (ii. 35, vL 8, 
ix. 47, xxiv. 38). Not in Jn., and only once each in ML and Mk. 

Iv TOLLS icapSicus ofiwK. This seems to imply that there had been 
no utterance. Christ read their thoughts. See on Rom. Lai. 

23* TI loriy euKOirwTepov, clireii' . . . ^ ctircti^. It is in this 
verse and the next that the three accounts are most similar 
almost verbatim the same. The challenge is a very practical one, 
and the point of it is in the ewrav. It is easier to say, "Thy sins 
are forgiven," because no one can prove that they are not forgiven. 
But the claim to heal with a word can be easily and quickly 

the very different meanings of " sitting at rest" and * f beginning"; or possibly 
of two verbs which are identical in spelling (Expositor^ April 1891, p. 2&5JL 
See on iii. 23. But these possibilities seem to be too isolated and sporadic to 
be of great value in accounting for differences between the Gospels, 


cfcicoirwTepov. Lit. " more capable of being done with easy labour " (e5, 
TOS). In N.T. always in the comparative (xvi. 17, xviii. 25 ; Mk. x. 25 ; 
Mt. six. 24) ; but cfaoirov occurs I Mac. 111. 18 ; Ecclus. xxii. 15. It is 
found in Pol) b., but not in class. Grk. For rls in the sense of " whether of 
two" like TfiTepos, as quis tUer % comp. xxii. 27; Mt. and. 31, atxiii. 17, 
xxvii. 17, 21 ; Xen. Cyr. iii. I. 17. 

24. 6 ul$$ TOU d^pcforou. This remarkable phrase in all four 
Gospels is invariably used by Christ of Himself; upwards of eighty 
times in alL The Evangelists never use it of Him, and no one 
ever addresses Him by this title. Yet none of the four ever 
directs our attention to this strict limitation in the use of the 
phrase, so that their agreement must be regarded as undesigned, 
and as evidence of their accuracy* 

In O.T. we have "son of man" used in three different connexions, and it 
must be noted that in each ca*e the rendering in LXX is vtos to&pdnrov and not 
6 vlbs rov avBpttjTfov. In the Psalms it is used of the ideal man : viii. 4, Ixxx. 1 6, 
cxliv. 3, cxlvi. 3. In Ezekzel it is the title by which the Prophet is addressed, 
u - * 3 6, 8, lit. I, 34, etc. etc.; upwards of eighty times in all. In Da-nut's 
night visions (vii. 13, 14), " One like a son of man came with the clouds of 
heaven, and came to the Ancient of Days," and received a dominion which was 
universal and eternal. With this should be compared various passages in the 
Book of Enoch, of which this is specially note woi thy. " There I saw one who 
had a head of days, and His head was white like wool ; and with Him was a 
Second, whose countenance was like the appearance of a man, and His counte- 
nance was full of grace, like one of the holy angels. And I asked one of the 
angels who were with me, and who showed me all the secrets, concerning this 
Son of Man, who He was, and whence He was, and why He goes with the 
Head of days. And he answered and said to me : This is the Son of Man who 
has justice, and justice dwells with Him ; and all the treasures of secrecy He 
reveals, because the Lord of the spirits has chosen Him, and His portion over- 
comes all things before the Lord of the spirits in rectitude to eternity. And this 
Son of Man, whom thou hast seen, will arouse the kings and mighty from their 
couches, and the strong from their thrones, and will loosen the bands of the 
strong, and will break the teeth of the sinners " (xlvi.). This Son of Man is the 
Messiah. He is called " the Anointed " (xlyiu. u, li. 4), " the Righteous One " 
(xxxviu, 2, liii 6), " the Elect One " (passim), and the Lord speaks of Him as 
'* My Son " (cy. 2). That these Messianic passages in the Book of Enoch are 
of Christian origin is the opinion of a few critics, but it is difficult to maintain it. 
Everything distinctly Christian is absent. This Son of Man or Messiah is not 
the Word, is not God. That He has Ived on the earth is nowhere intimated. 
Of the historical Jesus, the Crucifixion, the Resurrection, or the Ascension, there 
is not a hint ; nor yet of baptism, or of the euchanst, or of the doctrine of the 
Trinity. Why should a Christian write just what any Jew might accept about 
the Messiah and no more? But if the whole of the Book of Enoch was 
written before the birth of Christ, then we have sufficient evidence to show that 
when Christ was teaching on earth " Son of Man " was already accepted by the 
Jews as one title, although not a common one, for the Messiah. 1 The idea of a 
weak and suffering Messiah was unwelcome to the Jews, and therefore a name 

1 Le Livre d'fftnoch, en particulier, lequel tiait fort lu dans F entourage d* 
flsus (Judse Epist. 14) nous doune la clef de P expression de "Fils de fhomme," 
et des idles qui fy rattachaient (Renan, K de J. p. xi.). It is, of course, quite 
possible that the writer of the Book of Enoch took the idea from Daniel. For 
a discussion of the title see Dorner, Person of Christ^ Eng. tr. I. i. p. 54. 


which emphasized human weakness was not a favourite one, " But the very 
reason which induced them to avoid the title induced our Lord to take it. It 
expressed His Messiahship definitely enough for His purpose ; but it expressed it 
i| that veiled and suggestive way which characterised the whole of His teaching 
on His own person. At the same time, it conveyed to those who had ears to 
hear the whole secret of the Incarnation. That which the Jews shrank from 
and ignored He rather placed in the forefront of His mission " (Sanday in the 
Expositor^ Jan. 1891, p. 30, art " On the Tide, ' Son of Man * "), 

&rl -rijs Y^S- * n aH tnree accounts there is room for doubt as 
tc the words which this expression qualifies. Here either t&va-iav 

or afaevai d/wtprtas. In Mk. and Mt it may qualify 6 tto<? rod 
It is best taken with Qava-iav e^cc. But the difference 
in meaning is not great. 

tlttcy TW irapaXcXufi&w. This is not the apodosis to Iva clSjyre, 
but a parenthesis : l the apodosis to a/a etSrJJre is Sol Afyo>. Note 
the emphasis on croC : " to thee I say the crucial words." Clement 
of Alexandria gives this address to the paralytic in singularly dif- 
ferent language: ovcurra, $170-1 TO> wapet/tcva), TOV o-Kifjaro&a ty* ov 
KaraKCKrai Xa/?o>v airi0i ot/caSe (Pad. L 2, p. 101, ed. Potter). Prob- 
ably a paraphrase, 

25. Trapaxpfjjia dyaor&s IwSmop. Every one of these words is 
characteristic of Lk. For irapaxpfjua- Mk* has his equally charac- 
teristic cv6v$, a feature which recurs Lk. viii. 44, 55, xviiL 43, 
xxiL 60. Lk. has Trapa^fw, ten times in the Gospel and six times 
in the Acts : elsewhere only Mt xxi. 19, 20. For arao-ra? Mt. 
has lyepOek and Mk. fjyepQrj /cot: see On L 39. For ivuiriov avraiv 
ML has fwrpocr0y irdvrwv. 

opa$ <)>' 6 icaT&eiTo. // doit porter maintenant gra&at qui Pa 
si longtemps forte (Godet). The wording is peculiar to Lk., and is 
perhaps intended to suggest this inversion of relations. Lk. alone 
records that he glorified God. The phrase So^a^ctv TOV o'i> 
is specially common with him (ver. 26, vii. 16, xiil 13, xvii. 15, 
xviii. 43, xxiii. 47; Acts iv. 21, ad 18, xxL 20): once in Mk., twice 
in Mt, once in Jn. 

The reading tfi $ (R U A) is an obvious correction to a more usual con- 
itruction. For the ace. after a verb of rest comp. xxi. 35 ; Mt. xiii. 2 ; Mk- 
iv. 38; Jn. xxL 4; also Plato, Sym. 212 D, brurrijvtu tori rfa etpas. 

QQ. eKcrracris IXapc^ fiiran-as. Mk. has irdvras, Mt nothing. 
LL is fond of the stronger form- He alone records all three 
emotions amazement, fear, and gratitude to God. The last is in 
all three. For eiorrcuns comp. Mk. v. 42, xvi 8; Acts iii. 10; Gen. 
xxvii. 33; i Sam. xiv. 15; 2 Chron. adv. 14. Mt, whose narrative 

1 That this parenthesis occurs in exactly the same place in all three proves 
that all three made use of a narrative, the form of which was already fixed, either 
in memory or in writing (Salmon, Int. to N. 71 p. 121, 5th ed.). Comp. Lk 
riiL 28, 29 with Mk. v. 7, 8, where we have similar agreement in arrangement 


h much the most brief, adds after $oa<rav TOV eoV, rov SoVra 
Ifowwtv rouxvnqv rots ^vflpwTrots, which seems to refer to the pre- 
ceding Ifrvo-iaY $(4. He who is the Son of Man, the ideal repre- 
sentative of the race, bad vindicated His claim to possess authority 
to forgive sins. 

EZSajjw irap<8o|a cnftftcpoK The adj, occurs here only in N.T 
In LXX it is not rare (Judg. xiii. 13; Wisd. v. 2; Ecclus. xliii. 25- 
2 Mac* ix. 24; 4 Mac. ii. 13)* It is used of the miracles of Jesms 
in the famous passage, of very doubtful origin, in Josephus : <ro<os 
&VTJP, A ve avSpa avrov Xcyciv yprtf ty yap irapa,86<ov tpyuv irvLifrrjs 
LAntvriL 3. 3). Whereas 2vSoa (xiii. 17) has reference to the 
Sofa or glory of the agent, irapaSofa refers to the 8oa or opinion oi 
the spectators,- but Bofa in the sense of "opinion" or "belief" is 
not found in N.T. For the mixed form of aor. etSa/w see small 
print on L 59, and cornp. i Sam. x. 14 and 2 Sam. x. 14. 

S7-39. The Calling of Levi and the Discussion about Fasting. 
Mt ix. 9-17; Mk. ii. 13-22. In all three narratives this section 
is connected closely with the healing of the paralytic; but Mt 
places both incidents much later, viz. after the return from the 
country of the Gadarenes. 

The common identification of Levi with Matthew is probably correct ; but 
his fether must not be identified with the father of James the Less. Matthew 
is probably a contraction of Mattathias = "Gift of God," and this name may 
have been given to Levi after His conversion, like that of Peter to Simon. 
Comp. Joseph Barsabbas, surnamed Justus (Acts i. 23). In Galilee it ^was 
common to have two names ; and therefore both names may have been original. 
But if Levi was the earlier name, and was less well known among Christians, 
that would account for Mk. and Lk. using it, while Mt. equally naturally would 
let it be evident that a reXc^j had become, by Christ's mercy, the well-known 
Apostle. There can be no reasonable doubt that the three narratives refer to 
the same incident. And, as Levi is mentioned in no list of the Twelve, and 
Matthew is mentioned in all such lists, the identity of Levi the Te\<bvys with Mt 
the^rX^j^f and Apostle need not be doubted. Such doubts, however, are 
ancient They existed in the Gnostic commentator Heracleon (Clem. Alex. 
Strom, iv. 9, p. 595, ed. Potter), and were shared by Origen. They have been 
reproduced by Grotius (on Mt. ix. 9) and Michaelis ; and more recently by 
Sieffert, Neander, Ewald, Keim, and Reuss. But a satisfactory solution, which 
is not contradicted b^ any evidence, is not to be rejected because it does not 
amount to demonstration* 

S7, ^X^y. So also ML, while Mt has vapdyw 
Departure from the town, rather than from the house, is probably 
meant; and we therefore obtain no evidence as to the site of 
Capernaum. We may place Capernaum away from the lake, and 
yet suppose the rcAcowov to have been close to the shore. The 
customs collected there went to Herod Antipas, not to the imperial 
fscus (Jos, Ant. xvil n. 4, 5 ; J3.J. ii. 6. 3) : see on xx. 25. 

0<<raTo TCX^WIK. "Looked attentively at, contemplated, a 
tax-collector," as if reading his character. The verb often implies 


enjoyment in beholding (viL 24 ; Jn. i. 14, 32, 38 ; i Jn. L i). For 
the TeXwcu see on iii. 12. The Talmud distinguishes two classes 
of reXoivat : the Gabbai or tax-gatherer (e.g. of income-tax or poll- 
tax), and the Mokhes or custom-house officer. The latter was 
specially hated, as having greater opportunities for vexatious 
exactions, especially from the poor. Levi was one of the latter. 
The great commercial route from Acre to Damascus, which con- 
tinued until the crusades as the via mans^ passed the lake at or 
near Capernaum, and gave employment to excisemen (Is. ix. i). 

oVojACLTt Aeuetv. Mk. has Aeuiv rbv rov "AA<atou, and ML nas 
Ma00(uov. The fondness of Lk. for ovo/tan in introducing a name 
is here conspicuous. Mt has Aeyo/xow, and Mk* has neither. 
Comp. i. 5, x. 38, xvi. 20, xxiii. 50, and over twenty times in the 
Acts. Mt. and Mk, have ovo/wm once each. Jn. says oyo/xa 
avng (L 6, iii. i, xviii. 10). 

KaWipevov iirl TO reXtiviw. Excepting in the parallel passages, 
TeXtoviov does not occur in N.T. Nor is it common elsewhere. 
In Strabo, xvi. i. 27, it seems to mean "customs, taxes," and some 
would render en-l TO rcXwvtov, "to receive the customs." But it is 
more probable that it means the place where dues were collected, 
"the tol bothe" (Wic.) or "the custom-house" (Rhem.). Comp. 
the similarly formed Sc/cardivtov, "the office of a collector of tenths." 
Very likely Levi was sitting outside the portitorium. He must 
have been visible from the outside : the rf is "at," not "in." 

28. icaTaXiir&K irdrat. Lk alone mentions this. 1 Note the 
characteristic iravro, and comp. ver. u. The fact illustrates the 
doctrine, to which Lk. often bears witness, that riches are a peril 
and an impediment, and that the kingdom of God is specially 

Peached to the poor. The statement is against the supposition 
J.JB. ii. p. 969) that Mt. returned to his business afterwards ; and 
it is quite gratuitous to suppose that the statement is a mere 
reminiscence of ver. n. In that case why has d^i&ai been 
changed to icaroXctrciv? 

There is a slight awkwardness in jearoXanfr preceding ibaardt : the rising 
was the first act in die leaving all and in the following Christ. Both Mt and 

Lk. represent the following as habitual, ^/coXotffct. Mk. regards the single act 
on this occasion, ^JtoXotf0i7<re?. With the call, 'AxoXotfdet /UK, comp. Jn. i. 44, 
and with the result comp. ver. n and Mt. iv. 19, 22. The two combined lead 
one to the view that this is a call to become an Apostle. 


29. liroitjoreK 8ox^ fydXtjK. "Made a great reception 
uu) or banquet The word is peculiar to Lk, who has 
iroietv again riv. 13. The phrase occurs in LXX (Gen. 
zxL 8, xxvi. 30 ; Esth. L 3, v. 4, 8). Of course iv 73 01x19 aiToG 

* Ceseulmot suffti. Lapamk qui venait de gutrir le ttpreux, de rendrt am 
paralysl !e mouvemcnt ft de rtmettre Us ptchls, transforms &uda*n&it*itt ttf 
publicain en disciple (Didon,/. C. ch. iii. p. 340). 


means in Levi's house, which is not included in 

He was not at his house when he left all The irayra refers to his 

whole mode of life, his business as a 

It is strange that any one should understand the words either here or Mk. 
iL 15 as meaning " in the house of Jesus." Had Jesus a house? If so, how 
Improbable that Levi should hold a reception in it 1 If the narrator had meant 
this, must he not hare given the name instead of atfrofl, which would inevitably 
be misunderstood? Mt. has simply fr r# okfy, which possibly means "in- 
doors," as opposed to the outdoor scene &ri TO reXwvioy. There is no evidence 
that Christ had a house at Capernaum. After the call of Simon and Andrew 
He is entertained in the house of Simon and Andrew (Mk. i. 16, 29) ; and 
after the call of Levi He is entertained in the house of Levi. The new disciple 
wishes his old friends to make the acquaintance of his new Master. Ctst son 
premier actt missionair* (Godet). 

iroXiks TeXwpffli' Kal aXXw 01 TJOUK fur* aBjwK Kajaicci- 
This proves that the house was a large one, which the 
house of Jesus would not have been: and it also shows the 
character of the company, for only social outcasts would sit down 
at the same table with TeAGwu. 

80. lyoyYuJop oi 4>api<jcuoi KCH ot ypajxp-aTCts afrrwv. The avrwv 
means " the scribes of the Pharisees," *>. who belonged to that 
party. Some scribes were Sadducees. That this is the meaning 
is dear from Mk. ii. 16. It is pointless, and scarcely grammatical, 
to make avrw refer to the inhabitants of the place, who have not 
been mentioned. These scribes were probably not invited guests, 
but had entered during the meal, like the woman that was a sinner 
in the house of Simon. The Sinaiticus and other authorities omit 
nuv, doubtless because it was not clear what it meant 

which is not in Mk. or Mt., see Lft on Phil. ii. 14, and 
Kennedy, Sources of NT. Grk. p. 39. The Atticists preferred 

Both are probably onomatop. Note that here, as in vo 31, 33 and iv, 43, 
Lk. has vpb* c. ace. after a verb of speaking, where Mk. (ii. 16-19) nas ^ e 
dat See on L 13. 

Aii TI jwrd TOIK rcXwi^F xol dfjtaprwXwi' la0tT; The single 
article (so in all three) brackets them as one class. In Mt. and 
Mk. the disciples are not included in the charge (Mfa, not 
larQtere) ; but they both mention that the disciples were sitting at 
table with Jesus and the reXoivat, and therefore were open to the 
charge. Lk., on the other hand, does not mention that the 
disciples were sitting at table, but his cer&crc implies it With 
Sia TI comp. Exod. v, 14. 

81* In all three accounts Jesus ignores the insinuation against His disciples, 
and answers for Himself. He is responsible for the intercourse with tax- 
collectors and sinners. For ol vyiaCvovTcs Mt. and Mk. have oi ftrxtfozres. 
This looks like a deliberate change made by Lk. for the sake of a word which 
would more definitely express health as opposed to sickness. Like rapaXeXv- 
rapaXvriKcfc (m. iS, 24) and fturftu for &a<n6fct? (vi. 19), the&e changei 


may be the result of Lk.'s medical training (Hobart, p. 67 ; Salmon Int. to 
N.T. p. 129, 5th ed.). But would Lk. ha\e made changes in a repoit of 
Christ's words? There would be no need to have scruples, for ol fox' OPT is 
only a translation of the Aramaic, and Lk. might think that oZ iryiabovres was a 
better translation. Christ's reply is an argumenium ad hominem^ partly 
ironical. On their own showing the Pharisees had no need of a teacher, while 
these outcasts were in the greatest need of one. 

88. els perdvoiav. These words are peculiar to Lk., but in 
some texts have been transferred to Mk. and Mt Both ^cravota 
and /xcravoetv are freq. in Lk. See on xv. 7. Obviously those who 
are really Succuoi do not need to be called to repentance ; but who 
are Sfcoiot ? That is the question which Christ's reply suggests. 
If we had only Mk.'s account, we might suppose that what follows 
took place on some other occasion ; but both Lk. and Mt. (TOTC) 
connect it with the banquet in Matthew's house. 

S3. ol Be ctiraK. The same who asked the previous question, 
viz. the Pharisees and their scribes (ver. 30). Mt. says that it was 
the disciples of John who came up and put this question. Mk. 
states that both the disciples of John and the Pharisees were 
keeping a fast at that very time, and joined in asking why Christ's 
disciples did not do so also. We know from Jn. iii. 26 how 
jealous the Baptist's disciples were of Christ, and therefore ready 
to criticize. Perhaps they were also jealous of the freedom from 
legal restraints which His disciples seemed to enjoy. They leave 
an opening for the reply, " You have no need to fast." The four 
words which follow vrjorevovcrtv, viz. the words TruKrd ica! Sc^creis 
iroiouinrai, are peculiar to Lk. They imply that Christ's disciples 
habitually neglected the frequent fasts which the disciples of John 
and of the Pharisees kept. The fasts on Mondays and Thursdays 
are probably meant, which were not obligatory, but which some 
Pharisees observed (xviii. 1 2). Moses was believed to have gone up 
Mount Sinai on a Thursday and to have come down on a Monday. 
The Day of Atonement was the only fast of universal obligation. 
For TToietorOat Sc^aeis comp. i Tim. ii. i ; it refers to prayers at fixed 
times according to rule. The disciples of Jesus seemed to have no 
rule respecting such things. A late tradition fixes the number of 
the Baptisfs disciples as thirty, answering to the days of the 
month, as the Twelve are supposed to answer to the months of the 
year (Clem. Horn. ii. 23). ical mvoiKny. These words also are 
peculiar to Lk. in harmony with KOI a-tvere in ver. 30. 

84. Individuals were at liberty to choose their own days for 
fasting, but they must not select a sabbath or any of the great 
feasts. Christ suggests another exception, which very possibly 
was made by the Pharisees themselves. Is it possible to make 
the guests fast at a wedding? Mt. and Mk. omit the voieiv : Can 
the wedding-guests fast? Would it not be morally impossible to 


have such a combination ? To John's disciples this parable would 
come home with special force, for their master had called Jesus 
"the Bridegroom," and himself "the friend of the Bridegroom." 

rote ulous TOU KUfwfrwKos. The common Hebraism to express 
those who are closely connected with the w^wi comp. x. 6, 
xvL 8, xx. 36; Acts iv. 36; Mt xxiii. 15; Jn. xiL 36, etc. In 

1 Mac. iv* 2 ol wol rJJs <z*pas means the garrison of the citadel. 
But in LXX such expressions are not very common (i Kings i. 52; 

2 Sam. xii. 5 ; Gen. xi. io)> The word wn<f>uv seems scarcely to 
occur in class. Grk, but it is rightly formed (Tobit vi. 14, 17), 
Comp. vapQfvu>v, ywaiKwv, dvSpcov, /?OQJV, d/xTreXcuv, K.T.A. 

85. IXeJcrovrcu Be ^plpau " But days will come," />. days very 
different from the joyous days of the wedding. It is best to take 
this clause separately. After it there is an aposiopesis, which is 
mournfully impressive ; and then the sentence begins again. 

Kal oraK dirapOfj dir* CL&T&V 6 KUJA^IOS. There is no /cat in Mt 
or Mk., and some texts omit it here, because of its apparent 
awkwardness. We may take the JCGU as beginning a fresh sentence, 
or as epexegetic of the preceding clause. " But days will come 
and when the bridegroom shall be taken away," etc. Or, " But 
days will come, yea, days when the bridegroom," etc. The word 
farapOjj is in all three, and nowhere else in N.T. It is common in 
class. Grk., esp. of the moving of fleets and armies. 

-dre *Tj<7Tu<rou<rt*'. " Then they will fast " of their own accord. 
He does not say, " Then ye will be able to make them fast," which 
would be the exact antithesis of what goes before ; and the change 
is significant. Compulsion will be as superfluous then as it would 
be outrageous now : comp. xvii. 22. This is the first intimation of 
His death and departure, after which fasting will be appropriate 
and voluntary. Its value consists in its being spontaneously 
adopted, not forcibly imposed. This point is further developed in 
the short parables which follow. Note the characteristic CF 
Jiccivcus rcus ^/xcpats (not in Mt ix. 15), and see on ix. 36. 

86. "EXeyey W Kal irapapoX^ irp&s afaorfs. These introductory 
words ars peculiar to Lk., and the phrase Xfycw irapafioXyv is 
used by no one else (xii. 41, xiii. 6, xiv. 7, xviii. i, xx. 9). For the 
characteristic 8 K<U see small print on iii. 9, and for \4yew irptfe 
see on i. 13. For pairs of parables see on ver. 37 and xiii. 18. 

ATT& tjumou icaiyoG axwras. This also is peculiar to Lk.'s narra- 
tive, and it heightens the effect of the parable. Both Mt. and Mk. 
represent the patch as coining from an unused piece of cloth. To 
tear it from a new garment is an aggravation of the folly. A good 
garment is ruined in order to mend, and that very ineffectually, an 
old one. In all three we have eirt(3\rifjLa for patch ; in Mt. and Mk. 
wXrjfxofjua also ; and Mk. for cVi/SoXXei has fotpairra. In Plutarch 
and Arrian ^r^8X^/wi means "tapestry" for hangings. In the 


sense of "patch" it seems to occur only in Sym. Josh, ix.ii (5). 
The Latin translations of ItripXTjiui vary : commissura (Vulg.), insu- 
mentum (a), immissura (d). 

cl Si (ufoc (el te /w} ye, Lach. Treg.). "But if he acts otherwise," *.<?. if 
he commits this folly. Ni caveat crrorem (Grotms). The formula is freq. in 
Lk. (ver. 37, x. 6, xiii. 9, xiv. 32), who never uses cZ ft pit* EZ ft itf ye is 
stronger than el 83 /}, and follows both negative (auv. 32 ; Mt. ix. 17 ; 2 Cor. 
xi. 1 6) and affirmative sentences (x. 6, xiiu 9; Mt. VL i). It is found in 

Plato (jff#. ii. 375 C) : comp. Hdt iv. I2a 4. See Fritrsche on Mt. vi. I 
and Meyer on 2 Cor. xL 16. 

KCU T& JMM&V ox&reu " Both he will rend the new garment" 
in tearing the patch from it. AV. here goes wrong, although 
(except as regards the tense) all previous English Versions were 
right. Reading <rx%i with A and Vulg. rumpit^ Wic. Tyn. Cran. 
and Rhem. have "He breaketh the new," while Cov. has "He 
renteth the new." Beza has " the old breaketh the new." Luther 
and AV. seem to be alone in taking TO xcuvdV as the nont, " Both 
the new maketh a rent" With oxr comp. Jn. xix. 24; Is. 
xxxviL i. 

Kal TO KaiKOK . . . Kal TW iroXaiw. The double *ai marks the 
double folly. RV. avoids the awkwardness of "Both he will rend 
. . . andfas piece," etc., by rendering, "He will rend . . . and 
also the piece," etc. The combination with wu r waXoi^ shows 
that TO KOLVOV is object and not subject 

As to the precise meaning, interpreters are not agreed, beyond 
the general truth that a new spirit requires a new form. But the 
piece torn from the new garment is probably exemption from fast- 
ing. To deprive Christ's disciples of this freedom, while He is with 
them, would be to spoil the system in which they are being trained. 
And to impose this exemption upon the disciples of John and the 
Pharisees, would also spoil the system in which they have been 
trained. In the one case fasting, in the other non-fasting, was the 
natural outcome of the environment. For a variety of interpreta- 
tions see Godet, who in his third ed. has changed his own (1888). 

37* This second parable carries on and develops the teaching 
of the first We have similar pairs of parables in the Mustard seed 
and the Leaven, the Treasure hid in the Field and the Pearl of 
great price, the Ten Virgins and the Talents, the Lost Sheep and 
the Lost Coin, the Unwise Builder and the Unwise King. In three 
respects this second parable differs from the first (i) The piece 
of new doth represents only a fragment of the new system ; the 
new wine represents the whole of it (2) The new garment and 
the old one are only marred ; the new wine is lost and the old 
skins are destroyed (3) Not only is the wrong method con- 
demned, the right method is indicated (oXXa . . . /SXi/rc'ov). The 
argument is a fortiori. If it is a mistake to take the natural out- 


come from one system and force it upon an alien sys tern, much 
more fatal will it be to try to force the whole of a new and grow 
ing system into the worn out forms of an old one. " I thank Thee, 
O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that Thou didst hide these 
things from the wise and understanding, and didst reveal them unto 
babes" (x. 21), The scribes and Pharisees, wise in the letter of 
the kw, and understanding their own cramping traditions, were 
incapable of receiving the free spirit of the Gospel. Young and 
fresh natures, free from prejudice and open to new light and new 
impressions, were needed to receive the new word and preserve it 
unchecked and untramelled for future generations. On the fitness 
of the twofold parable to the occasion Bengel remarks, parabolam 
a veste^ a vino: imprimis opportunam convivio. 

cwSets |3dXXei oW vlov cis dcrtcous iraXaious. For a\Xp of 
pouring liquids comp. Jn. xiiL 5; Mt. xxvi. 12; Judg. vi. 19; 
Epictet iv. 19. 12. Skin-bottles, utres, are still in use in the East, 
made of a single goat-skin (Horn, //. iii. 247), from which the flesh 
and bones are drawn without ripping up the body. The neck of 
the animal becomes the neck of the bottle. Gen. xxL 14, 15, 19; 
Ps. cxk. 83. Comp. Hdt ii. 121. 20, iii. 9. 2; Horn. Od. v. 265. 
In Job xx3oi. 19 it is said that even new skins are ready to burst 
when they are full of new wine : comp. xxxvui. 37. See Herzog, 
PRE? art. Schlauch\ Tristram, Nat. Hist, of B. p. 92. 

88. otfov viw cts do-Kods Kcurods pXijTlo?. Here certainly, and 
perhaps here only in N.T., the difference between veos and JMUVOS 
must be marked in translation : "New wine must be put mto fresh 
wine-skins," While ve'os is new in reference to time^ " young " as 
opposed to "aged," KCUVOS is new in reference to quality ^ " fresh w 
as opposed to "worn out." Trench, Syn. Ix.; Crem. Lex. p. 321. 
But "a fresh heaven and a fresh earth " (2 Pet. iii. 13; Rev. xxi. i), 
and still more a "fresh Jerusalem" (Rev. iii. 12, xxi. 2), would be 
intolerable. No English version prior to RV. distinguishes here 
between vios and /ca^os; and Vulg. has novus for both. None 
translates &TKOI "skins" or "wine-skins," but either "bottles" 
(Wic. Gran. Rhem^AV.) or "vessels]' (Tyn. Cov. Gen.). The 
conclusion, /cat d/i^orcpot erwn/powrat, is an interpolation from Mt. 
ix. 17 (KB L and Aegyptt omit). 

3d. This third parable is peculiar to Lk. While the first two 
show how fatal it would be to couple the new spirit of the Gospel 
with the worn out forms of Judaism, the third shows how natural it 
is that those who have been brought up under these forms should 
be unwilling to abandon them for something untried. The con- 
version of an outcast rcXoJv^s, who has no such prejudices, may be 
easier than one whose life is bound up in the formalism of the past. 
Grotius, starting from Ecclus. ix. 13, ou/os i/co? <tXos v4oy lav 
/wr ev^/XKrifofs vittrat avroV, interprets : Signifoavit ho* 


proverbio Chrlstus homines non subito ad austeriorevt vitampertra- 
hendoS) sed per gradus quosdam assuefadendos esse \ which implies 
that Christ considered Jewish fasting the more excellent way, up 
to which His disciples must be gradually educated. Moreover, the 
subito on which this explanation turns is an interpolation : u0o>$ 
is not genuine (K B C 1 L, Boh, Mth. Arm. omit). Wetstein quotes 
a multitude of passages to show that old wine was considered to 
be superior to new, and concludes ; Pharis&orum austeritas com- 
paratur vtno novo^ Christi lenitas vino wteri\ which exactly inverts 
the parable. The comparative merits of the old and the new wine 
are not touched by the parable, but the taste for them. One who 
is accustomed to old will not wish for new : it does not attract him 
by look or fragrance. 

7<p- "O iraXai&s xP 1 ) * 1 "^* larir. The reading of A C and Vulg. 
(xp77<rr6re/)os, melius) is a manifest corruption. The prejudiced person will 
not even try the new, or admit that it has any merits. He knows that the old 
is pleasant, and suits him ; and that is enough : he is not going to change. 
Pharts&is doctrina sua antiqua magis eratadpalatum, quam gcncrosadoctnna 
JiesU) quam illiputabant esse navana {Beng.)> and which they would not even 
taste. Comp. Rom. vii. 6 ; 2 Cor. iii. 6. If we admit the undoubtedly 
spurious wtitus, we have another iambic line in this verse as in ver. 21 : v&v 
ToXatoV etf&fos 0\et vtov. The whole verse is omitted in D and hi most of 
the best MSS. of the old Latin ; but WH. seem to be alone in placing it in 
brackets as of doubtful authority. On the three parables see Trench, Studies 
in the Gospels, pp. 168-183. 

VI. 1-5. The first Incident on the Sabbath (see Maurice, Lec- 
tures on St. Luke, p. 823, ed. 1879). T^ 6 Call of Peter was followed 
by two healings which provoked opposition to Christ : and now the 
Call of Levi is followed by two incidents on the sabbath, which 
lead to similar opposition. Mk. agrees with Lk. in placing these 
two immediately after the call of Levi ; Mt. has them much later 
(xii. 1-14). On the connexion here see Schanz, ad loc. 

I. iv aappdrw Scu-rcpoirpcfrno. This passage is a well-known 
crux in textual criticism and exegesis. Is SevrepoirpwTv part of the 
true text? If so, what does it mean ? The two questions to some 
extent overlap, but it is possible to treat them separately. 

I. The external evidence is very much divided, but the balance is against 
the words being original. 1 The reading is Western and Syrian, and "has no 
other clearly pre-Synan authority than that of D aff" The internal evidence is 
algo divided. On the one hand, " The very obscurity of the expression, which 
does not occur in the parallel Gospels or elsewhere, attests strongly to its genuine- 
ness** (Scriv.), for "there is no reason which can explain the insertion of this 

. ACDEHKMRSUVXrAAn most cursives, Vulg. Syr-HarcL 
Goth. Arm., Epiph. Chrys. Greg-Naz. Amb. Hieron. and perhaps 
m B L six or seven good cursives, Syrr. Boh. Aeth. 

omit is not of much moment, as they often omit notes of time. 


word, while the reason for omitting it is obvious" (Tisch.) On the other hand, 
*' all known cases of probable omission on account of difficulty are limited to 
single documents or groups of restricted ancestry, bearing no resemblance to the 
af.vation of text in either variety or excellence" (\V1I.). Moreover, if any 
&al;.>ath had really borne this strange name, which is introduced without explan- 
ati-m as familiar to the readers, it would almost certainly have been found 
el=L where, either in LXX, Philo, Josephus, or the Talmud. In the life of 
Eutychius (512-582) by his chaplain Eustathms BevTepoirpdrry Kvptaicft is used of 
the first Sunday after Easter, but the expression is obviously borrowed from this 
passage, and throws no light In the whole of Greek literature, classical, 
Jewish, or Christian, no such word is found independently of this text. The 
often quoted flewepoSeAar??, "second tenth" (Hieron. ad Ez. xlv. 13), gives no 
help. The analogy of Sevrepvydfjios, SevreporuKos, * f,X, suggests the meaning 
of *'a sabbath which for a second time is first" ; that of Sevrepdrxaros, which 
Heliodorus (apud Soran. Med. vet ) uses for " last but one,'* suggests the mean- 
ing "first but one," & "second of two firsts." But what sense, suitable to 
thy passage, can be obtained from either of these ? The more probable conclusion 
is that tYj word is spurious. 

How then did it get into the text and become so widely diffused ? The con- 
jecture of Meyer is reasonable. An early copyist inserted rpcSry to explain iv 
trap's o-a^dry in ver. 6 ; this was corrected to devrepy because of iv. 31 ; and 
the next copyist, not understanding the jorrection, combined the two words. 
A few MSS. ha\e the reading Sevrepty irp&rv, among them R (Cod. Nitriensis), 
a palimpsest of the sixth cent, in the Biiti$>h Museum See Knight's Field 

2. If the word is genuine, what can be its meaning? Jerome put this ques- 
tion to Gregory Nazianzen, and the latter zleganter lustt, saying, Docebo tt super 
hoc re in ecclesia (Hieron. Ep. hi.) Of the numerous conjectures the following 
maybe mentioned as not altogether incredible, (i) The first sabbath of the 
second year in a sabbatical cycle of seven years. This theory of Wieseler has 
won many adherents. (2) The first sabbath in Nisan. The Jewish civil year 
began in Tisn, while the ecclesiastical year began m Nisan ; so that each year 
there were two first sabbaths, one according to civil, the other according to 
ecclesiastical reckoning : just as Advent Sunday and the first Sunday in January 
are each, from different points of view, the first Sunday in the year. It would 
be possible to call the second of the two "a second first Sunday." But would 
anyone use such language and expect to be understood? (3) The first sabbath 
of the second month. It is asserted that the story of David obtaining the shew- 
bread would often be in the lesson for that sabbath. But the lectionary of the 
synagogues in the time of Chnst is unknown. See on iv. 17. For other guesses 
see Godet, McClellan, and Meyer. Most editors omit or bracket it. Tisch, 
changed his decision several times, but finally replaced it in his eighth edition. 

SieuropeJccrOai aurd? Sid oriroptfAw^ Excepting Rom. XV. 24, the 
verb is peculiar to Lk. (xiii. 22, xviii. 36; Acts xvi. 4), In N.T. 
cnro/H/ios occurs only here and parallels. In Theophr. ( H> P. vi. 5. 4) 
we have ^ mopi/ty, sc. yrj. In Gen. L 29 it is applied to the seed, 
iravTa \6prov crn-optjjiov <nripov cnrcpfta ; SO that, like oraripe<r^eu, it 
can be used either of the field or of the seed. 

IriXXoy 01 p,a0rjTal aurou ical rjo-OioK rods ordxuas. For this 
Mk. has ypgavTo 6Sov vroitw riAAoi/res rous oro^ua?, which has been 
interpreted to mean " began to make a way by plucking the ears," 
But (i) all three imply that Jesus was walking in front of the dis- 
ciples. What need was there for them to make a way ? (2) How 
would plucking the ears make a path? (3) In LXX 686? voiclv is 


used for tier facere (Judg. xvii. 8). All three mean that the 
disciples went along plucking the ears. This was allowed (DeuL 
xxiii. 25). 

t|/o6xoT$ rats x P <rt/ *' This an< ^ * ne TiXXows constituted the 
offence : it was unnecessary labour on the sabbath. According to 
Rabbinical notions, it was reaping, thrashing, winnowing, and pre- 
paring food all at once. Lk. alone mentions the rubbing, and the 
word i/wx*"' seems to occur elsewhere only in the medical writer 
Nicander (Tkenaca^ 619). It is from the obsolete ^oJw, a collat 
form of \l/da. Comp. Hdt. iv. 75. 2, For the action described see 
Robinson, Res. in PaL i. pp. 493, 499. 

2. TIKCS 8e TCJI> 4>apunuwK. As in ver. 30, they are represented 
as addressing their question to the disciples. In Mk. ii. 24 and 
Mt. xii. 2 the charge against the disciples is addressed to Christ, 
while in Mk. ii. 16 and Mt. ix. n the charge against Christ is 
addressed to the disciples. The TOIS crdppcuriv may mean either 
"on the sabbath days" (AV. and most English Versions) or "on 
the sabbath day" (RV.). Although Vulg, has in sabbatis^ Wic. 
has "in the saboth"; COT. also "upon the sabbath." See on 
iv. 31. 

3. ouS^ TOUTO d^Kcm 8 lirofqow AauefS. "Have ye not read 
even this that David did?" Does your knowledge not extend 
even thus far? RV. follows AV. in translating o faoapw as if it 
were the same as the rl Ijrofifw of Mt and Mk., "what David 

KOI ot |ier* ofiroO Sires. "The young men,* whom David was 
to meet afterwards. He came to Nob alone (i Sam. XXL x}. 

4. i<rijX0v ts -&v oW TOU 6oG. This is not stated in (XT., 
but may be inferred from his being seen by Doeg the Edomite^ 
who was " detained before the Lord " : i.c. he was hi the tabernade 
as a proselyte, perhaps to be purified, or to perform a vow. 

rods oproDs -rijs irpoO^orcojs- Lit "the loaves of the setting 
forth." These were the twelve loaves of wheaten bread placed 
before the Lord in the Holy Place every sabbath. The word 
"shewbread" first appears in Coverdale, probably from Luther's 
Schaubrote. Wic. follows the fanes propositionis of Vulg. with 
"looves of proposisiounn," which is retained in Rhem, Tyn. has 
"loves of halowed breed." In O.T. we have also 5prot rw 
rpcxroHTov, i.e. of the presence of God (i Sam. xxi. 7; Neh. 3L ^33)^ 
or aprot O^TTOH (Exod. xxv. 30), or aproi TS irpoo-^opas (i EdngS 
vii. 48), or again 01 5pr<n o! SwwravTos, fa* "the perpetual loaves "* 
([Num. iv. 7). But the expression used here, Mt xiL 4 and Mk. 
ii. 26, occurs Exod. xxxix. 36 ?, xL 23 ; i Chron. ix. 32, xxiiL 29 : 
comp. 2 Chron. iv. 19. For the origin of ^ irpoflccns TWV oprwr 
(Heb. ix. 2) comp. a Chron. xiii. ii, xxix. 18. See Edersh, The 
Temple, pp. 152-157; Herzog, P&EJttt. Schaufovte. 


F xol rots P.CT* adrou. This also is not stated in i Sam. 
xxL, but it is implied in David's asking for five loaves, and in 
Abimelech's asking whether the wallets of the young men were 
Levitically clean. For e<rw c* ace. tt inf. see on xx 22 

5. Kupios corny row crappaTou 6 0165 TOO dyOpc&Trou. In all three 
accounts Ki'pios comes first with emphasis. The Son of Man con- 
trols the sabbath, not is controlled by it This does not mean 
that He abrogates it (Mt v. 17-20), but that He has power to 
cancel the literal observance of it in order to perform or permit 
what is in accordance with its spirit. Mk. gives the additional 
reason that ** the sabbath was made for man, and not man for the 
sabbath," & that it was given to be a blessing, not a burden. 
Even the Rabbis sometimes saw this; "The sabbath is handed 
over to you j not, ye are handed over to the sabbath " (Edersh. 
Z. <5r* 7! iL p. 58). Ritual must give way to charity. The Divine 
character of the Law is best vindicated by making it lovable ; and 
the Pharisees had made it an iron taskmaster. And, if the sabbath 
gives way to man, much more to the Son of Man. In Jn. v. 17 
Christ takes still higher ground The Father knows no sabbath in 
working for man's good, and tht' Son has the same right and 
liberty. For 6 ulds TOU 6.vQp<Jmou see on v. 24. The point here is 
that Christ as the representative of man defends man's liberty. 

Cod. D transfers ver. 5 to after ver. 10, and instead of it has the remarkable 
insertion : rj ai/r$ fj/J^pp 0ea(rd./j,ev6s riva tpya6fj,evov rf (rajS/Wry elirev at5r* 
HvQpuTcc, el pJkv ailSas rl votets, jua/cd/nos eZ* el S /J} oZ5as, &inKG,rdpa,TOs Kal 
wvpapdrqs el rov vAfiov. For foBptaire comp. XXL 14 ; tirucarAparos, Jn, vu. 47 ; 
rapapd-np vbpov, Rom. ii. 25, 27 ; Jas. ii. n. It is possible that the tradition 
here preserved in Cod. D is the source from which both S Paul and S. James 
derive the phrase rapapdnjs v6pov. In Rom. ii., where it occurs twice, we have 
the address faBptavc twice (w. i, 3). There is nothing incredible in Christ's 
having seen a man working (not necessarily in public) on the sabbath. The 
words attributed to Christ are so unlike the undignified, silly, and even immoral 
inventions in the apocryphal gospels that we may believe that this traditional 
story is true, although it is no part of the Canonical Gospels. D has other con- 
siderable insertions Mt xz. 28 and Jn. vi. 56. See A. Resch, Agrapha 
Aussercanonischc Evangdienfragmcntc (Leipzig, 1889) pp. 36, 189, 

The Second Incident on the Sabbath. Mt. xii. 9 would 
lead us to suppose that it was the same sabbath (fieraySas ei0v 
tyX0a>). Lk. definitely states that it was & ercpw o-a^ar^, but not 
that it was "on the very next sabbath following." He alone 
mentions that Jesus taught in the synagogue on this occasion, and 
that the withered hand that was healed was the right one. 

6. l&y&ero & . . . e&rqXfct? aMv . . . Kal fy * . . K&l fy. The same 
Hebraistic constr. as in ver. Z, somewhat modified hi accordance with classical 
usage : see note at the end of ch. L We have &poL at the Pool of Bethesda 
"n. v. 3); but outside N.T. the word seems to mean, when applied to the 
body, either "not wet" or "lean." 


7. TrapT7)pouiTo Sc afiroK ot ypa\L}ia.7i<$ KCU ol <aptaaioi. Lt 
alone tells us who the spies were. Mt. puts their inquisitiveness 
into words, " Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath day ? " The verb 
signifies "watch narrowly," esp. with sinister intent, perhaps from 
looking sideways out of the corner of one's eyes, ex obhquo ct 
occulto. As in GaL iv. 10, the mid. gives the idea of interested 
observance. ML has ?rapen?pow : comp xx. 20; Sus. 12, 15, 16; 
Polyb. xvii. 3. 2 ; Aris. Rket. ii 6. 20; Top. viii. n. i. 

i Iv T ffapp<Tw Oepaireuci. The present has reference to His 
habitual practice, of which His conduct on this occasion -vould be 
evidence. But KB with other authorities read 0epa7rwei, which 
is probably genuine in Mk. iii. 2, and may be genuine here. The 
future would limit the question to the case before them 

tva cvpaxriv Ka-nj-yopetv avriSv. According to what is probably the 
invariable rule in N.T. we have the subj. in spite of the past tense on 
which the final clause is dependent The opt for this purpose is obsolete) 
for yi'ot (Mk. ix. 30) and similar forms are probably meant to be subj. 
Simcox, Lang, of N.T. p. 107. 

8. atfros Se iJSet rods SiaXoyicrjio&s afiTwc. " But He," in contrast 
to these spies '(v. 16, viii. 37, 54) "knew their thoughts." For 
SiaXoywrjios comp. ii. 35, v. 22, ix. 46, xxiv. 38. It commonly 
means intellectual and inward questioning rather than actual dis- 
puting : but see on v. 22 and comp. i Tim. ii. 8. 

TW di>8pl TW %r\p&v fyovrt TT|K x ^P a - " To the man who had 
his hand withered," not " who had the withered hand." For avSpl 
comp, v. 12 : Mt. and Mk. have avOpwirv. 

*Eyeip KCL 0-77)61 els 76 n&roy. Lk. alone preserves this. 
Christ's method is as open as that of His adversaries is secret. 
"Arise and stand into the midst" ; t.e. "Come into the midst and 
stand there": comp. xi. 7; Acts viiL 40. Win. L 4. b, p. 516. 
In what follows note LL's favourite dyao-ra? (L 39), which neither 
Mt nor Mk. has here. 

None of them records any words of the man ; but Jerome in commenting on 
Mt. xu. 13 states, in evangelio quo utuntur tfazarcni et Ebionit& . . . horn* 
iste qui andam habet manum c&mmcntarius scribitur y istiusmodi votibui 
auxihum pr scans ^ C&mentartus eram^ manibus vietum quseritans : precor it, 
ut mihi restitues sanitattm> nt turpittr mendicem cibos. See on xviiL 25. 

9. "EirfipwT^cria up,as, el. He answers the questioning in their 
hearts by a direct question which puts the matter hi the true light 
To refuse to do good is to do evil; and it could not be right to do 
evil on the sabbath. 

The reading of TR., 6r*pwnJ<rw fyta* rt, is wrong in both variations) and 
has the disadvantage of being ambiguous, for rt may be indefinite or inter* 
rogative. " I will ask you something, Is it lawful?* etc. Or, "I will uk 
you what is lawful," etc. 


o-oxrai ^ diroXfoat, It was a principle of the Rabbinisti 
that periculum vit& pellit sabbatum; but the life must be that of a 
Jew. This canon was liberally interpreted ; so that a large number 
of diseases might be attended O on the sabbath, as being 
dangerous. These modifications of the rigid rule were based on 
the principle that it was lawful to do good and avert evil on the 
sabbath; and to this Jesus appeals. If the Pharisees said, "This 
man's life is not in danger," the answer would have been easy, 
"You do not know that, any more than in the cases always 
allowed." The addition of 17 &7roAeW has special point, for this 
was what these objectors were doing. They did not consider that 
they were breaking the sabbath in plotting to destroy Jesus on 
this day (ver. 7). Were they to be allowed to destroy, while He 
was forbidden to save? 

10. irepip\et|K(jii>os irrfrras aurous, Mk. adds, still more 
graphically, per opyrjs, <nAAwror5/ievos CTTI 777 n-wpoScra T^S /ca/A'as 
avr&v: but ^ravras is peculiar to Lk. See on vii. 35 and ix. 43, 
Mt. omits the whole of this, but inserts the case of the sheep 
fallen into a pit Lk. has a similar question about an ass or ox 
fallen into a well, which was asked on another occasion (xiv. 5). 

*EcTiwv TT)y x ^P^ <TOU - As His challenge to His enemies 
remained unanswered, He now makes trial of the man. The 
attempt to obey this command was evidence of his faith. 

With the double augment in aveKdretrrddij comp. 
&are07cttfa<ra7, fawc/Mprtipow, ^upicrrai, which occur in various writers. 
Exod. iv. 7, dTejcar&rnj ; Jer. xxui. 8, dreKarlortyo-er; Ign. Smyr. a., 
dTcar<rn&f. Win. xii. 7, a, p. 84. 

Cod. D here inserts ver. 5. 

UL ivoCas. The phrensy or loss of reason which is caused by extreme 
excitement; dementia rather than insifientia (Vulg.) or amentia (Beza). 
Plato distinguishes two kinds of dvoia, rb (jv ftavLav, rb 5' dfjadlav ( Tim. 
86 B). It is the former which is intended here. Elsewhere 2 Tun. iii. 9 ] 
Prov. aodL 15 ; EccL XL IO; Wisd. xv. 18, adx. 3 ; 2 Mac. iv. 6, etc. 

TI &K iroi^ffaieK. "What they should do," if they did any- 
thing. In Lk. the opt. is still freq. in indirect questions : see on 
iii. 15. ML says that the Pharisees forthwith took counsel with the 
Herodians how they might destroy Him (diroA.cVoxriv). They 
would be glad of the assistance of the court party to accomplish 
this end. With their help Antipas might be induced to treat 
Jesus as he had treated the Baptist Lk. nowhere mentions the 

The Aeolic form Tufaeiav is not found in the best MSS. here. In Aeti 
xriL 27 Tf/Tj\a(frfffeuLjf is probably genuine. 


VI. 12-VHI. 66. From the Nomination of the Twelve to their 
First Mission. 

In proportion as the work of Christ progresses the opposition 
between Him and the supporters of moribund Judaism is in- 

12-10. The Nomination of the Twelve. Common to all 
three : comp. Mk. iii. 13-19 ; Mt x. 2-4. 1} faction des Douze est 
k premier acte organisateur accompli par Jisus-Christ. Sauf les 
sacrements y test le seuL Car ftiait ce coll^ge^ une fois constitut^ qui 
devait unjourfaire le reste (Godet). 

12. fr rats rjfUpais T. See on i 39. This expression, like 
ey^i/cro and \v with the participle, are characteristic of Lk., and are 
not found in the parallels in Mt. and Mk. For the constr. comp. 
w. i and 6 ; for Trpoo-eu'laorflcu see Introd. 6. The momentous 
crisis of choosing the Twelve is at hand, and this vigil is the pre- 
paration for it 

Siawicrepe-uwv. Here only in N.T., bat not rare elsewhere ; Job H. 9 
(where LXX has much which is not in the extant Heb.) ; Jos. Ant. vi 

13. 9 ; B.J. L 29. 2 ; Xen. Hcllcn. v. 4. 3. The analytical tense emphasise! 
the long continuance of the prayer. 

rg Trpoo-cuxij TOU ecou. The phrase occurs nowhere else. It 
means prayer which has God for its object: comp. fAo$ ov 
(Rom. x. 2) ; 6 #}Ao$ TOV ot/cou <rov (Jn. ii. 17); ffrri5 l^o-ou (Gal 
iii. 22). Win. xxx. i. a, p. 23 1. 1 That irpoerevx^ here means an 

2). Win. xxx. i. a, p. 23 1. 
oratory or place of prayer is incredible: see on Acts xvL 13. 
Lightfoot says that some Rabbis taught that God prays : " Let it 
be My will that My mercy overcome My wrath." But such trifling 
has no place here. 

13. iy&eTo ^fipa. The phrase is freq. in LL (iv. 42, xxii 66 ; 
Acts xii. 1 8, xvL 35, xxiii. 12, xxvii. 29, 33, 39). ^Trpoac^ytjorcv. 
" Called to Him, summoned." This is the more correct use of 
the word. Elsewhere in N.T. it means "address, call to"; and, 
excepting Mt XL 1 6, it is used only by Lk. (viL 32, xiiL 12, 
xxiii. 20; Acts xxi. 40, xxii. 2). rods fMtfy-nfe. These are the 
larger circle of disciples, out of whom He selected the Twelve. 
Comp. Jn* vL 70; Mt. xix. 28; Rev. xxL 14* That either the 
larger circle or the Twelve had spent the night with Him is neither 
stated nor implied. 

^icXcf <jjtKos. This implies the telling over (Afyav) in preference 
to others (&) for one's own advantage (mid.). The word is fatal 

1 Green compares Ir* e&re/fclp 6eou (Jos. Ant. ii. 8. i) and Tpfo Ixereiaf ro0 
6coO (ii. 9. 3): and, for the art before vpwrevxjj "as an abstract or genoal 
term Mt m. 22; Acts i 14; I Cor. vii. 5 (Gram. cfN.T. p. 87). 


to Lange's theory that Judas was forced upon our Lord by the 
importunity of the other Apostles (L. of C. ii. p. 179). 

ous KCU dTTooroXous &y6^uurev. Not at the time possibly, but 
afterwards. The KCU marks the naming as a separate act from the 
election. The word dir6*oro\o$ is used only once each by Mt. 
(x. 2), Mk, (vi. 30), and Jn. (xhL 16) ; by Lk. six times in the 
Gospel (ix. 10, xi. 49, xvii. 5, xxii. 14, xxiv. 10) and often in the 
Acts. In the Gospels the Twelve are generally called the Twelve. 
The word occurs once in LXX, cyo> cl/u cwroo-roAos irpos o-c o-KA^oos 
(i Kings xiv. 6) ; and once in N.T. it is used of Christ (Heb. iii. i). 
See Lft Ga/atians, pp. 92-101, 6th ed.; D.B? art. " Apostle "; 
Harnack in Texte u. Unttrsuch. ii. in if.; Sanday on Rom. i. i. 
The theory that Lk. writes in order to depreciate the Twelve, does 
not harmonize with the solemn importance which he assigns to 
their election. And criticism is out of harmony with itself, when 
it adopts this theory, and then suggests that Lk. has invented this 
early election. See on xxii. 45. 

. In construction the twelve names are in apposition to d7ro<rr6Xoit, 
and the narrative is not resumed until ver, 17. The four lists of the Apostles 
preserved in the S>noptic Gospels and the Acts agree in two main features. 
I. The names are arranged in three groups of four. 2. The same Apostles, 
Peter, Philip, and James of Alphseus, stand first in each group. Only in respect 
of one name is there material difference between the lists. In the third gmup 
Lk. both here and Acts i. 13 has Judas of James ; for whom Mt. (x. 3) and 
Mk. (lii. 18) have Thaddaeus or Lebbseus. In both places Thaddseus is prob- 
ably correct, Lebbaeus being due to an attempt to include Levi among the 
Apostles. Levi = Lebi or Lebbi, the Greek form of which might be Le^Scuos, 
as 6a55atos of Thaddi. Some MSS. read Lea?0y, which is still closer to Levi. 
See WH. il App, pp. 12, 24. The identification of Thaddseus with Judas of 
James solves the difficulty, and there is nothing against it excepting lack of direct 
evidence. No pairing of the Apostles is manifest in this list as in that of Mt* 
If the Koi after Qwpav be omitted, there is a break between the second and third 
group; but otherwise the list is a simple string of names. In the first six 
names Lk. agrees with the first three pairs of Mt. In the other six he places 
Matthew before Thomas (while Mt places himself last in his group) and Simon 
Zelotes before Judas of James. 

14. Jifiwm OP Kal &v6y.a.vtv fttrpw. The similarity to the pre- 
ceding clause is marked. This certainly does not mean that Simon 
received the name of Peter on this occasion, and there is nothing 
to show that the Twelve received the name of Apostles on this 
occasion. But it should be noticed that henceforth Lk. always 
speaks of him as Peter (viii. 45, 51, ix. 20, 28, 32, 33, xii. 41, etc.) 
and not as Simon. In xxii. 31 and xxiv. 34 Lk. is quoting the 
words of others. Hitherto he has called him Simon (iv. 38, v. 3, 
4, 5, 10) and once Simon Peter (v. 8), but never Peter. In the 
Acts he is never called Simon without the addition of the surname. 
The usage with regard to the names Saul and Paul is very similar 
See papers by Dean Chadwick on "The Group of the Apostles" 


and on "Peter" in E\positor, 3rd series, vol. ix. pp. 100-114, 
187-199, 1889; also Schanz, adloc. p, 216. 

'ApSpla?. Only in his lists of the Apostles does LL mention 
Andrew. Mt. mentions him on one other occasion, and ML on 
three others (Mt. iv. 18; ML i. 16, 29, xiii. 3). Nearly all that we 
know about him comes from Jn. (i. 41, 45, vi, 8, xii. 22). Although 
one of the earliest disciples, he does not become one of the chosen 
three, although Mk. xin. 3 seems to indicate special intimacy. For 
legends respecting him see Lipsius, Apokryphen Apostelgtschichten 
u. Apostellegenden^ i. pp. 543-622 ; Tregelles, Canon Muratorianus> 

PP- i?> 34- 

9 ldKG>poi> KOI *\udw\v. This is their order according to age, and 
it is observed in all three Gospels ; in Acts L 13 John precedes 
James. The fact that James was the first of the Twelve to be put 
to death is evidence that he was regarded as specially influential. 
James and John were probably first cousins of the Lord; for, 
according to the best interpretation of Jn. xix. 25, their mother 
Salome was the sister of the Virgin Mary. That the title of 
Boanerges was given to them "at the time of the appointment of 
the Twelve" (D.B* i. p. 1509) is a baseless hypothesis. See 
Trench, Studies in the Gospels^ pp. 138-146 ; Suicer, Thesaurus^ s.v. 
fipovrq. For legends see D.B? L p, 1511 ; Lipsius, iii pp. 201-228, 
i. pp. 348-542. 

+i\wnro^. All that we know of Him comes from Jn. (i. 44-49, 
vi. 5-7, xii. 21, 22, xiv. 8, 9). There seems to have been some 
connexion between him and Andrew (Jn. L 44, xiL 22) ; and both 
in Mk. iii. 18 and Acts i. 13 their names are placed together in the 
lists; but the nature of the connexion is unknown. Lipsius, 
iii. pp. 1-53. 

BapGoXofiaiop. The ancient and common identification w*th 
Nathanael is probable, but by no means certain, i . As Bar-tholomew 
is only a patronymic, " son of Talmai," the bearer of it would be 
likely to have another name. 2. The Synoptists do not mention 
Nathanael ; Jn. does not mention Bartholomew. 3. The Synoptists 
place Bartholomew next to Philip, and Philip brought Nathanael to 
Christ 4. The companions of Nathanael who are named Jn. xxi. 2 
are all of them Apostles. Lipsius, iii. pp. 54-108. 

15. Ma00a!op ica! 0&>jiap. In all three these names are com- 
bined , but Mt. reverses the order, and after his own name adds 
6 reXwi^s, which is found in none of the other lists. All that we 
know of Thomas is told us by Jn. (xL 16, xiv. 5, xx. 24-29, xxi. 2). 
Lipsius, iii. pp. 109-141, i. pp. 225-347. 

'IdKcapop *A\4>tuou. His father is probably not the father of Levi 
(Mk. IL 14), and James himself is certainly not the brother of the 
Lord (Mt xiiL 55 ; Mk. vi. 3 ; Gal. i. 19) who ^as the first over- 
seer of the Church of Jerusalem (Acts xii. 1 7, xv 13 ; GaL ii 9, 12* 


The brethren of the Lord did not believe on Him at this time 
(Jn. vii. 5), and none of them can have been among the Twelve. 
But the Apostle James the son of Alphaeus is probably identical 
with James the Little (Mt xxvii. 56 ; Mk. xv. 40 ; Jn. xix. 25), for 
Alphasus and Clopas may be two different Greek forms of the 
Aramaic Chalpai; but this is uncertain. See Mayor, Ep. of 
S*Jame3i pp. i-sdvi; also Expositor's Bibk> S. James and S. fade* 
pp. 25-30 (Hodder, 1891). In all the catalogues James of Alphaeus 
heads the third group of Apostles. Lipsius, iii. 229-238. 

TO> jtoXotfpei'op (qXirr/ji'. 1 Lk. has this in both his lists, while 
Mt and Mk. have 4 Kavavotos, which in some authorities has 
been corrupted into Kavavtfn^. Neither of these forms can mean 
" Canaanite," for which the Greek is Xavavatos (Mt xv. 22 and 
LXX), nor yet "of Cana," for which the Greek would be Kavcuos. 
Kwxveub* is the Aramaic Kanan in a Greek form (on the analogy 
of QapuroLos from Pharish and *A<r(ri8aros from Chasicf) and 
Lipsius, iii. pp. 142-200. See on i 36. 

Rhem. leaves the word untranslated, Cattan&us, and Wic. makes it unintel- 
ligible, "Ctnane." All the other English Versions make it a local adj., "of 
Oana," or "of Cane,** or "of Oanan, or "of Canaan," or "the Canaamte." 
The last error seems to begin with Cranmer in 1539 RV. is the first to make 
clear that "Kanansean** means "Zealot" Lft. On Revision^ pp. 138, 139 
(154, 155, 2nd ed.) ; Fritzsche on Mt. x. 4. The Zealots date from the time of 
the Maccabees as a class who attempted to force upon others their own rigorous 
interpretations of the Law. S. Paul speaks of himself as irepttnror^wy ^Xorrfc 
fordpftwr rOr rarpiK&v pov rapattoew (Gal. L 14), /.<?. he belonged to the 
extreme party of the Pharisees (Acts ygftr 3, xxiii. 7, xxvi. 5 ; Phil. 111. 5, 6). 
Large numbers of this party were among the first converts atjerusalem (Acts 
rri. 20). From these extremists had sprung the revolt under Judas of Galilee 
(Acts. T. 37 ; Tos. Aiti. xvui. i. i, 6), and the Sicaniy who were the proximate 
cause of the destruction of Jerusalem (Jos. B. J. iv. 3. 9, 5. I, 7. 2, vii. 8. i, 
10. I, n. i). Mihnan, J5TA of tfo Jews, ii. pp. 191, 291, 299, 323, 4th ed. 
1866; Ewald, Hist, of Israel^ vii. 559 ff., Eng. tr. ; Herzog, PRE? art 
" Zeloten." Whether the Apostle Simon was called &\kwrl\s because he had 
once belonged to this party, or because of his personal character either before or 
alter bin caul, most remain uncertain. 

16. *lorfW 'laicdpou. That there were two Apostles of the 
name of Judas is dear from Jn. xiv, 22, although Mt. and Mk. 
mention only one ; and the identification of their Thaddseus with 
the Judas not Iscariot of Jn. and with this Judas of James makes 
all run smoothly. lovSa? 'IOKG^OV must be rendered "Judas the 
son of James," not " the brother of James," for which there is no 
justification. When Lk. means "brother" he inserts d8A.<^(Jt 
(iii i, vi 14 1 Acts xii 2). Nonnus in his Paraphrase (MerajSoA,^) 
Of Jn. xiv. 23 has lov&xs vios *Ia/cci)/3oto. "lovSas dSeA<os 'Iajc>/?ov 
(Jude i) is quite a different person, viz. the brother of James the 

2 This use of caXo^cyot is very common in Lk. (vii n, viiL 2, ix. 10, x. 
39^ zzL 37, mi 3, xxiii 33), and still more so in Acts. Not in Mt Mk. or Jn. 


Lord's brother. Tyru Cov. and Cran. rightly supply "sonne" 
here, and Luth. also has sohn. The error begins with Beza's 
fratrem* Of this James, the father of Judas Thaddaeus, nothing 
is known. Lk. adds the name of the father, because his arrange- 
ment places this Judas next to the traitor. 

*loricapu0. This epithet probably means "man of Kerioth," 
which was a place in Judah (Josh. xv. 25), or possibly in Moab 
(Jer. xlviii. 24). Jn, vi 71 confirms this; for there and Jn, 
xiiL 26 the true reading gives "Judas son of Simon Iscariot"; 
and if the name is a local epithet, both father and son would be 
likely to have it. In this case Judas was the only Apostle who 
was i?o* a Galilean, and this may have helped to isolate him. 
Other derivations of "Iscariot," which connect the word with 
"lying," or " strangling, v or "apron," /.*. bag, or "date-trees" 
(jeopeam'Scs), are much less probable. We know nothing about 
Simon Iscariot Farrar identifies him with Simon Zelotes, which 
is most improbable. Simon was one of the commonest of names. 
The MSS. vary between 'Iovca/>ic>0, which is right here, and *Lnea/Dia>- 
T7/5, which is right xxii. 3. Here only is irpoSo-njs used of Judas : 
it occurs in the plur. Acts vii. 52 ; 2 Tim, Hi. 4; and in the sing, 
2 Mac. v. 15, x. 13. All English Versions go wrong about ly&e-ro 
Nowhere in Scripture is Judas styled **& traitor," and 
should be distinguished from fy : therefore, not " was tht 
traitor," but "became a traitor," as the American Revisers pro- 
posed. Judas "turned traitor." The difficulty about the call of 
Judas is parallel to the powers bestowed upon a Napoleon. The 
treason of Judas shows that no position in the Church, however 
exalted, gives security against the most complete falL 

The verb used of the treachery of Judas is never TpoSiS&vat, bat rapato- 
$6vai (rrii. 4, 6, 21, 22, 48; Mt. x. 4 ; Mk. iii. 19 ; Jn. vi. 64, 71). In 
class. Grk. irpo5t56vat commonly has this meaning; irapadtddvcu rarely. 
Here the Lat texts vary between proditw (Vulg.) and traditar (c f ffj r) and 
qut tradidit eum or ilium (d e). 

17-19. The Descent from the Mountain, and many Miracles 
of Healing. The parallel passages in Mk. iii. 7-12 and Mt iv. 24, 
25 are very different from Lk. and from one another in wording. 

17. irl TOTTOU jrcSiKoG. This may mean a level spot below the 
summit ; but in connexion with jcara^as, and without qualification, 
it more naturally means level ground near the foot of the mountain. 
Hither it would be more likely that multitudes would come and 
bring their sick, than to a plateau high up the mountain. 

The Latin texts vary : in loco compfstri (Vulg.), m loco compens* (a), in L 
piano (f) mljcdiplano (L). 

iroXds fw.e^rQv afrrov. Not a nom. pendens, but 


included in the preceding ?<rn;: comp. the constr. uii. 1-3. He 
stood, and they stood. But the &rn? is no evidence as to Christ's 
attitude during the discourse, because the healings intervene: 
iv. 20 shows that Lk, is aware of Christ's sitting to preach. 

KCL! ir\ij0o$ iroXo TOU Xooo, K.r.X. This is a third group. Christ 
and the Twelve form one group. The multitude of disciples in 
the wider sense form a second. And besides these there is a 
mixed throng from Judsea and the sea-coast : see on xL 29. 

The prep, is not classical ; but we say "to be cured Jrom" 
(Mk. v. 29). In the perf., I aor, and I fat pass, the dep. &o/uu is pass* in 
meaning (vii. 7, viil 47, xvii. 15 ; Acts liL n). Except in Lk., the verb is 
rare in N.T. writers. There should be at least a colon at rwv vkrwv arp : 
here the long sentence which began at ver. 13 ends. 

18, 19. For similarly condensed accounts of groups of miracles 
comp, iv. 40, v. 15, vii. 21. We once more have an amphibolous 
expression : see on ii. 22. Here d-nrd weup-ciTttv dicaOdpro)^ may be 
taken either with wox^ovpevot or with e&pairevovro. From ver. 17 
and vii. 21 we infer that the latter constr. is right: "They that 
were troubled with them were healed of unclean spirits." But in 
the other cases the gen. with &iro follows the verb ; so that 
cvo^Xov/to'ot ano may be right. The " and " before " were healed " 
in AV. is from a corrupt reading : not only Wia and Rhem. with 
Vulg., but also Cov., omit the "and" For nvcujidTwv dKctSdpiw 
see on iv. 33. Note nag and irdvTas here and irdcrrjs in ver. 17. 
They are not found in Mk. iii. 7, 10 : see on ver. 30. With irap* 
afirofi !ji]pxTo comp. Jn. xvi. 27. Lk, commonly writes clepx^ 
pat diro: see small print on iv. 35, and comp. viii. 46, which 
illustrates attrecrdat, Sum/us, and e>;p;(ero. For SiWju? and Idro 
see on iv. 36. 

20-49. The Sermon Irt TOTTOI; ireStvow. 

To call it " the Sermon on the Plain," following the AV. In ver. 17, is con- 
venient, but scarcely justifiable* "The plain" has not been mentioned, and 
rb reSlov does not occur in N.T. Moreover, it is by no means certain that this 
tiros ircdiyfe was at the foot of the mount And to talk of * the Sermon on 
the Plain " assumes, what cannot be proved, that the discourse here recorded is 
entuely distinct from "the Sermon on the Mount" (Mt. v. i-vii. 29). The 
relations between the two discourses will never cease to be discussed, because 
the materials are insufficient for a final decision. The following are the chief 
hypotheses \vhich have been suggested in order to explain the marked similari- 
ties and differences, i. They are reports, at first or second hand, of twc 
imilar but different discourses, distinct in tame, place, and circumstance (Auger, 
Greswell, Osiander, Patntius, Plumptre, Sadler ; so also in the mam Barradius, 
Basil, Doddndge, Toletus, Tostatus), 2. They are reports of two different 
discourses delivered on the same day, Mt giving the esoteric address to the 
disciples on the mountain, Lk* the exoteric address to the mixed multitude 
below (Augustine, Lange). 3. They are recensions, with interpolations and 
omissions, of two independent reports of one and the same sermon (Schleier- 
macherj. 4, They are recensions of the ssme report, to which ML addi 


material from other sources, and from which Lk. peihaps omits portions (B. 
Weiss). 5. Mt. gives a conflate arrangement of sayings which ^ere uttered on 
various occasions, and some of these occasions are gi\en by Lk. (Dioeu, Calun, 
Godet, Holtzmann, Keim, Kuinoel, Neander, Pott,, Wtjzvcker, 
Wieseler). 6. Both sermons are a conglomeration of detached say ings collected 
into an anthology of aphorisms (Strauss, and to some e^ent Baur). Brides 
the writers mentioned above under the last four heads, a muhitude of commen- 
tators adopt the view that the main portions of the reports given by Mt, and Lk, 
represent one and the same discourse (Bengtl, Bucer, Calowus, Caspar!, 
Chemnitz, Chrysostom, De \Vette, Ebrard, Edersheim, Elhcott, Euald, Farrar, 
Fritzsche, Grotius, Hilgenfeld, Keim, Lewin, Luther, McClellan, Meyer, 
Milman, Olshausen, Oosterzee, Ongen, Robinson, Schanz, Schneckenbarger, 
Sieffert, Stroud, Tholuck, Tischendorf, Wordsworth). 

Bad or inadequate arguments are used on both sides. It is a great deal too 
much to say with Schleiermacher that the fact that the portions common to both 
appear in the same order, ^ith the same beginning and end, "proves tncontro- 
vertibly the identity of the discourse." Any preacher repeating a carefully 
prepared sermon would begin and end in the same way, and would put 
his points in the same order. And it is mere dogmatism without argument 
when Sadler asserts that "the Lord must have pronounced each [beatitude] 
which St. Matthew records, and yet it is equally plain that He could hardly 
have pronounced them according to St. Luke's form. He would not have 
said, Blessed are ye meek ones, Blessed are ye merciful ones, Blessed are 
ye peacemakers. The four given by St. Luke are the only ones which could 
well have been pronounced personally on the disciples ; so that the beatitudes 
as given by St. Matthew and St. Luke respectively, could not have been altered 
forms of the same discourse." Much more reasonable is the position of Grotius, 
who believes that both record the same sermon : sicutfacti narrationes circum- 
stantiis congruentes non temereadresdwersas referenda* sunt, if a sermones ruhil 
vctat ss&pius habitos eosdem out similes, prs&sertim contwentes wt& totius pr&- 
cepta, qu& non fotuentnt mmium ssipe repeti (on Lk. vi. 17). We know 
beyond all question that some of pur Lord's words were uttered several times, 
and there is nothing antecedently improbable in the hypothesis that the wolds 
of this discourse, qu& nonpotuerunt mmium s&pe repeti^ were delivered in one 
or other of these forms more than once. Nor does it follow that those portions 
which Lk. gives as having been uttered on other occasions were not also uttered 
as parts of a continuous discourse. A preacher naturally repeats fragments of 
his own sermons in giving catechetical instruction, and also gathers up detached 
items of instruction when composing a sermon. The feet that Lk. meant to 
record these other occasions may have been part of his reason for omitting the 
similar words in this discourse. Another consideration which may have deter- 
mined his selection is the thought of what would best suit Gentile readers. But 
in any case th* dictum of Grotius must be remembered, that the hypothesis of 
a repetition of verbally similar sayings may be used with much more freedom 
tfoan the hypothesis of a repetition of cTrcsiTpsta.ntia.ny similar acts. 

The conclusion arrived at by Sanday and P. Ewald is of this kind. The 
beatitudes originally stood in the Logia in a form similar to that in Mt. v. 3-12. 
Lk, used the Logta, but had also a document entirely independent of the Logia \ 
and this contained a discourse, spoken originally on some other occasion, but 
yet so like the Sermon on the Mount as to be identified with it by Lk. The 
sermon in Luke is, therefore, a compound of the reports of two similar but 
different discourses ; and in this compound the elements derived from the Logia 
are dominated by those derived from the independent document (Expositor foi 
April 1891, p. 315). It seems, however, simpler to suppose that Lk. took the 
whole of his report from the document which contained this very similar, but 
different sermon. See Paul Feine, Ucbcr das gcgenseit. VerhaUniss d. Texte dcf 
Bcrgpredigt bet Mattk&us und Lukas in fhtjafir&.jur Pretest* Thtologic, zi. I, 



The following tables will show the parallels between the two Evangelists i 


Uc. vi. 20, 21 , 

, 23 . 

31 . 

Mt. Y. 3, 4, 6. 

II, 12. 

Til xa. 

Lk. vi. 37, 38 , 

41, 42 . 

43-46 . 

Mt. vii. I, 2. 





Lk. ihr. 34, 35 
TiiL 16 and XL 33 

XVL 17 . 

XVL 18 . 

ri. 2-4 
33* 34 


v. 13, Lk. XL 34-36 . 
ic. XVL 13 . 

18. XIL 22*31 . 

as, 26. . 9-13 

Mt fi 21-23. 




Lk. vL 39 


. . Mt. xv. 14. Lk. vi. 40 . . 

Mt x. 14. 

This last saying was frequently uttered. It is recorded twice by Jn. (adii. 1 6, 
zv. 20), and the four records seem to refer to four different occasions ; besides 
which we have a similar utterance Lk. xxii. 27. 

These tables leave three verses of the sermon in Lk. without a parallel in 
Mt (or any other Gospel), viz. the four woes corresponding to the lour beati- 
tudes, 277. 24-26. The portions of the sermon in Mt which have no parallel in 
Lk. amount to forty-one verses, viz. Mt v. 5, 7-10, 14, 16, 17, 19-24, 27-31, 
33-38, 43> * 1-8, H-iS, vii. 6, 14, 15. 

The plan of both discourses is the same. I. The qualifications of those who 
can enter the kingdom (Lk. 20-26 ; Mt v. 1-12) ; 2, The duties of those who 
have entered the kingdom (Lk. 27-45 ; Mt v. 13-vii. 12) ; 3. The judgments 
which await the members of the kingdom (Lk. 46-49 ; Mt vii. 13-27). En* 
couragement, requirement, warning ; or invitation, principles, sanction ; these 
are the three gradations which may be traced in these discourses ; and, as Stier 
remarks, the course of all preaching is herein reflected. 

There is considerable unanimity as to the spot where the sermon was 
delivered (Stanley, Sin & Pal. pp. 368, 369; Caspar*, Chron, and Gtograph, 
/j/, totluL. o/C. 108, p. 171 ; Robinson, Pal. ii. 370, iii. pp. 241, 485 ; 
Farrar, L. ofC. L p. 250, and on Lk. vL 12; Keim, Jts. of Nat. u. p. 289). 
On the other hand, Edersheim asserts that " the locality is for many reasons 
unsuitable " ; but he gives no reasons (L. & 71 L p. 524 see also Thomson. 

. The Qualifications necessary for Admission to the 
Kingdom : the Happiness of those who possess them (20*23), and 
the Misery of those who possess them not (24-26). This contrast 
of Blessings and Woes at the beginning of the sermon corresponds 
with the contrast in the potable with which it ends, 


WOES nr LK, 


TTW^oi Ttf *7fftf- X, tl TTWXotj &Tt tylf- I* 

yn afrnw fffTuf ij rtpa WTO' 17 pcunAcui TOM on dTe^crc TIJF 

paffiXtla T&Y ofl/xij'WF* 6eoD. 

2. oi revBovrrct, tin 3. ol jcXaforrtf 

4. ol TetpcSrrej icoi &^- 2. oZ retwSFTff yfir, i 

8. &rrc 5ray dveiSfoaxrur 4. &re flnv furfawru' 4. 

/MU /cai 5tt^w<rtx /cai iJ^ay oZ AvdpuTot., Kal $w TW& rctrrej oj dr^pi 

ehrciftrtx TOF fov^pbv xa$' dfoplcwtr v^as xal 6rei- Kara ra a&ra yap trolov* 

&K& Sio-wm Kal iKfitiXtaffur rb nit \f/cv8orpo<pfinus I 

Ivexa roD wZoO 

ffrt"6 fwr6bs tjj&v roXdt TOU* 
Ar rotj oipayotj- otfrw? Tip 

ro^f rpd d/Aow. fr r$ otpavt}- Kara ra 

dr& -ydp ^jrolow rots vpo- 
^ro oi var^pet airrGnr. 

VI. 20-23. Four Beatitudes; which correspond to the first, 
second, fourth, and eighth in Mt v. 3-12 ; those rekting to the 
meek, the merciful, the pure in heart, and the peacemakers being 
omitted In the four that Lk. gives the more spiritual words which 
occur in Mt are omitted, and the blessings are assigned to more 
external conditions. Actual poverty, sorrow, and hunger are 
declared to be blessed (as being opportunities for the exercise of 
internal virtues); and this doctrine is emphasized by the corre- 
sponding Woes pronounced upon wealth, jollity, and fulness of 
bread (as being sources of temptation). It is in the last Beatitude 
that there is least difference between the two. Even hi Lk. 
unpopularity is not declared to be blessed, unless it is "for the 
Son of Man's sake"; and there is no Woe pronounced upon 
popularity for the Son of Man's sake. 

SO. Kal auros irdpas rods &f>0aXjtods afrrou els TO&$ paOijnfe. 
Lk.'s favourite mode of connexion in narrative : see on v. 14 and 
comp. viii i, 22, ix. 51, etc. With fadpas r. o<f>0. comp. xviii 13 
and Jn, xvii. i. We must not take efe with IXc^er; Lk. would 
have written wpo% and after cXeyey; contrast xxiL 65 and Mk. 
lii 29. Mt has irpocrfj\Qav aurw ot /tMtdqrat avrov. *at . , . cSc'Sacr/ccv 
avrous. The discourse in both cases is addressed to the disciples } 
there is nothing to indicate that the discourse in Lk. is addressed 
to mixed multitudes, including unbelieving Jews and heathen. 
These Beatitudes would not be true, if addressed to them. It is to 
the faithful Christian that poverty, hunger, sorrow, and unpopularity 


are real blessings ; to others they may be mere sterile suffering. 
Whereas, even for the heathen, to be poor in spirit and to hunger 
and thirst after righteousness are blessed things. In Mt. the 
Beatitudes are in the third person and have a wider sweep. 

This is the common constr. both in LXX and N.T., the 
reason for the blessedness being expressed by a noun or participle which is the 
subject of the sentence (Ps. 11. 12, ad. 5, xh. 2, Ixxxiv. 5, 6, 13, Ixxxix. 16, 
etc.); but the reason is sometimes expressed by the relative with a finite verb 
(Ps L I, xxxu. I, 2; Lk* xiv. 15; Jas. i. 12), or by ten (xiv, 14; i Pet 
iv. 14), or by tfo (Jn. xiii. 17 ; I Cor. vu. 40). 

ot TTTWXOI. See on iv. 18. We have no right to supply ry 
imiyart from Mt. It is actual poverty that is here meant. Nor 
is it the meaning that actual poverty makes men " poor in spirit." 
Still tabs does it mean that in itself poverty is to all men a blessing. 
There is no Ebionite doctrine here. But " to you. My disciples, 
poverty is a blessing, because it preserves you in your dependence 
on God, and helps you to be truly His subjects " : TO yap v/icrcpa 
SeiKTiKois rpos irapovras eXeycTo (Eus.) Some of these disciples had 
made themselves poor by surrendering all in order to follow Christ. 
Comp. Ps. Ixxii. 12, 13. 

uficrepa crriK f\ j3ao~i\eCa. " Yours is the kingdom," not "will 
be," It is not a promise, as in the next Beatitudes, but the state- 
ment of a fact But the Kingdom is not yet theirs in its fulness ; 
and those elements which are not yet possessed are promised in 
the Beatitudes which follow. 

21. ot TrciywvTss KOK. " Those of you who are suffering from 
actual want in this life. Ye shall have compensation." 

eXoprao^o-eaOe. Originally the verb was confined to supplying 
animals with fodder (xopTos), and if used of men implied a brutish 
kind of feeding (Plato, Rep. ix. p. 586). But in N.T. it is never 
used of cattle, and when it is used of men it has no degrading asso- 
ciations (ix. 17; Jn. vi. 26; Phil. iv. 12; Jas. ii. 16); not even 
xv. 1 6, if the word is genuine there, nor xvi. 21. Comp. TOU$ 
in-toXovs CIUTT}? xP r a' a> aprwv (Ps. cxxxii. 15). In LXX xopTactt 
and vtfMrXqfu, are used to translate the same Hebrew word, some- 
times in the same verse : on ^xopracrev ifrvxyv Kevyv, K<U tyuxyv 
-rreivQa-av ivlirXfi^v ayati&v (Ps. cvii. 9). Here the filling refers to 
the spiritual abundance in the Kingdom of God. In all four cases^ 
although the suffering endured is external and literal, yet the com- 
pensating blessing is spiritual. 

ot K\<uoiTs WK. Mt. has irv0owTes, which expresses the 
mourning, while jeAaiWcs implies outward manifestation of grief in 
loud weeping, just as ycXotrere implied outward expression of mirth 
in laughter. Though common in LXX, yeXow occurs in N.T. only 
here <md ver. 20, 


22. d^opiWriy fyas. " Mark you off from (<&ro) by a boundary 
os)." It is used both in a good sense (Acts xiiL 2; Rom* i i; 
Gal. i. 15) and also in a bad, as here. Comp. Kat p <jforo yas cSpwrc 
(Eur. Hec. 940). Excommunication from the congregation as well 
as from social intercourse is here meant. The usual sentence was 
for thirty days, during which the excommunicated might not come 
within four cubits of any one. Comp. Jn. ix. 22, 201. 42, xvi. 2. 
Whether there was at this time a more severe form of excommunica- 
tion is uncertain. Herzog, PRE* art Bann bei den Hebraern \ 
Grotius on Lk. vi. 22 ; Lightfoot, Hor. Heb* on Jn. ix. 22. 

The object to be supplied may be either the preceding 
fjs (so most English Versions) or the following T& 6vo^o, bjuav (Bede, Weiss)* 
Vulg. supplies nothing ; and Tyn. and Gen. ha^e simply ** and rayle " with- 
out an object Neither AV. nor RV. has " >ou " in italics. 

v TO OKOJIO, fyw <&s ironrjpoV. "Throw your name con- 
temptuously away, reject it with ignominy, as an evil thing.** 
There is no idea of striking a name off the list as a mark of dis- 
grace, ex albo expungere^ a meaning which /cj3aAAv never has. 
It is used of hissing an actor off the stage and otherwise dismissing 
with contempt (Aristoph. Eq. 525 ; Nub. 1477 > Soph. O. C. 631, 
636 ; O. T. 849 ; Plato, Crify 46 B). "Your name" means "the 
name by which you are known as My disciples," as Christians. 
"Christian" or "Nazarene" was a name of bad repute, which it 
was disgraceful, and even unlawful, to bear, for Christianity was 
not a religio licita. For Trowjpov as an epithet of ovo/xa comp. DeuL 
xxii. 19. 

lKKa TOU uloG roG di'Opc&'irou, A vital qualification. The hatred 
and contempt must be undeserved, and be endured for Christ's 
sake ; not merited by one's own misconduct. 

23. aKipr^crare. Peculiar to Lk. See on L 41 and comp, 
Mai. iv. 2. 

icard, ret auT& y&p eiroiouK TOIS irpo^rais. This implies that they 
are to receive " a prophet's reward " (Mt x. 41), as in this world, so 
in the next 

For the dat. comp. ro?; fuo-ova-tr tifufo (ver. 27). In class. Gk. we should 
have had ri aurA frcotour rous vpo<p. Thus, ^/a> dl ravra rouror trotipv, <rbw 
dixy (Hdt. L 115. 3, iv. 166. 3 : comp. Aristoph. Nitb* 259; Vesp. 697). la 
later Gk. the dat of relation becomes much more common. 

ot iraTifpes aurwv. The gen. refers to ot avOpwroi in ver. 22 ; 
w the father of them n who hate and abuse you. 

24-26. Four Woes corresponding to the four Beatitudes 
There is no evidence that these were not part of the original dis- 
course. Assuming that Mt and Lk. report the same discourse, 
Mt. may have omitted them. But they may have been spoken on 
some other occasion. Schleiermacher and Weiss would have it 


that they are mere glosses added by Lk. to emphasize and explain 
the preceding blessings. Cheyne thinks that some of them were 
suggested to Lk. by Is. Ixv. 13-16. We have no right to assume 
that no persons were present to whom these words would be 
applicable. Even if there were none present, yet these Woes 
might have been uttered as warnings both to those who heard 
them and to others who would learn them from those who heard 
Just as the Beatitudes express the qualifications of those who are 
to enter the Kingdom, so these show the qualities which exclude 
men from it. It is possible that some of the spies and adversaries 
from Judsea were among the audience, and thus Jesus warns them 
of thdr condition. When the discourse as placed by Mt was 
spoken there was less opposition to Christ, and hence no Woes 
(Pastor Pastorum^ p. 256). 

4. irXi^v. Curtius makes it\fy an adverbial form of rX^or, so that its 
radical meaning would be " more than, beyond" (Gr. Etym. 282) ; but Lft. 
(Phil. iii. 1 6) connects it with rAas, in the meaning " besides, apart from 
this, only." For the accusafcval form comp. SlKrjy, MK\IP, clam^ coram. It 
sometimes restricts, sometimes expands, what precedes. It is a favourite 
word with Lk., in the Gospel as an adv. (ver. 35, x. 1 1, 14, 20, xi. 41, xii. 31, 
ziii* 33, xvii I, xviu. 8, xix. 27, xxu. 21, 22, 42, xxiiL 28), in the Acts as a 
prep. (viu. i, xv. 28, xxm. 22). " But " is the only possible rendering here. 

/jttv Tots irXou<noi$. As a matter of fact the opponents of 
Christ came mostly from the wealthy classes, like the oppressors of 
the first Christians (Jas. v. 1-6). See Renan, LAntechrist^ p. xii ; 
Ewald, Hist of Israel, ii. p. 451. But the cases of Nicodemus and 
Joseph of Arimathea show that the rich as such were not excluded 
from the kingdom. d-n^cre. "Ye have to the full"; so that 
there is nothing more left to have. The poor consolation derived 
from the riches in which they trusted is all that they get : they 
have no treasure in heaven. Comp. Mt vi. 2, 5, 16 ; Philem. 15 ; 
and see Lft on Phil. iv. 18. This meaning is classical : comp. 
&7roXafjLpdvti> } aTrepyafo/wii. For irap<i<Xif]criy see on ii. 25, and comp. 
xvL 25 of Lazarus. 

26. 01 cjMrcTrXiriqi&oi W)K. " Sated with the good things of this 
life,** like Dives (Ezek. xvL 49). Grotius compares the epitaph, 
roarer l^co ocrcr eiriov /cat iSiyrvcu It may be doubted whether the 
change of word from xPe<r0ai (ver. 21) indicates that horum 
pknitudo non meretur nomen satietatis (Beng.) : comp. i. 53. In 
Lat Vet and Vulg. we have saturor both here and ver. 21. 

ffcirtCacrc. This received a partial and literal fulfilment when 
Jerusalem was reduced to starvation in the siege : but the reference 
is rather to the loss of the spiritual food of the Kingdom. Comp. 
Is. Ixv* 13. Hilld said, "The more flesh one hath the more 
worms, the more treasures the more care, the more maids the more 
unchasruy, the more men-servants the more theft The more law 

tn. 25-27.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 183 

the more life, the more schools the more wisdom, the more counsel 
the more insight, the more righteousness the more peace.* 

ol ycXwircs KOK. " Who laugh for joy over your present pro- 
sperity," the loss of which will surely come and cause grief. But 
the worst loss will be that of spiritual joy hereafter (Is. Ixv. 14). 

26. oray icaXws thwnv flfwte. It is the wealthy who are com- 
monly admired and praised by all who hope to win their favour. 
The praise of worldly men is no guarantee of merit : rather it shows 
that those who have won it do not rise above the world's standard 
(Jn. xv. 19; Jas. iv. 4). Plutarch says that Phocion, when his 
speech was received with universal applause, asked his friends 
whether he had inadvertently said anything wrong, 

TOIS v|fu8orrpo<jn]T<us. Just as the persecuted disciples are the 
representatives of the true Prophets, so the wealthy hierarchy 
whom all men flatter are the representatives of the false (Jer. 
v. 31 ; comp. xxiii. 17 ; Is. xxx. 10 ; Mia ii. n). 

Having stated who can and who cannot enter the Kingdom, 
Jesus goes on to make known the principles which regulate the 

27-45. Requirement: the Duties to be performed by those 
who are admitted to the Kingdom of God. This forms the T"ain 
body of the discourse. Lk. omits the greater portion of what is 
reported in Mt respecting Christ's relation to the Mosaic Law 
(v. 17-19), and His condemnation of existing methods of interpret- 
ing it (v. 20-48) and of fulfilling it (vL 1-18). This discussion of 
Judaic principles and practices would not have much meaning for 
Lk/s Gentile readers. The portion of it which he gives is stated 
without reference to Judaism. The main point in Mt is the 
contrast between legal righteousness and true righteousness. In 
Lk. the main point is that true righteousness is love; but the 
opposition between formalism and the spirit of love is not urged. 
The opposition which is here marked is the more universal 
opposition between the spirit of selfishness and the spirit of love. 
There is a break in this main portion, which Lk. marks by making 
a fresh start, Efcw & teal -irapaftoXipr avrols, but the second half 
(39-45) continues the subject of the working of the principle ol 

27. 'AXXd. What is the contrast which this <iXXt marks? The 
emphatic position of the v/uv seems to show that the contrast is 
between those on whom the Woes have been pronounced and the 
feithful hearers now addressed Others interpret, " But, although 


I have denounced them, I do not allow you to hate them : you 
must love them." There is, however, no indication that the 
enemies who are to be loved are the wealthy who have just been 
denounced, and such a limitation of the meaning of enemies 
cannot be justified : comp. Mt. v. 44. 

rots dKocjoutriK. "Who give ear and obey," rots imtfo^epow 
(Euthym.). It is unnatural to take it literally as meaning " My 
audience," in contrast to the rich who have just been addressed in 
their absence. Representatives of the rich may have been present 
among the audience. Schanz interprets "who listen with attention." 

There is on the whole a double climax in what follows, the worse the 
treatment received, the better the return made ; but it is not quite exact f One 
would expect that d^ara-re would be coupled with rout /u<roi/ra. This is the 
first time that Lk. uses the word dTairpp, which sums up the whole spirit of the 
Gospel : it is most frequent in the writings of Jn. *' It should never be 
forgotten that fafdrtj is a word born within the bosom of revealed religion : it 
occurs in the Septuagint ; but there is no example of its use in any heathen 
writer whatever" (Trench, Syn. xii.). This is not true of a:ya.vq.v and dTard- 
tfffw, which are common in class. Grk. But Christianity has ennobled the 
meaning of both &yavq.i> and <pi\ci*>, with their cognates : tp$v, which is scarcely 
capable of such advancement, does not occur in N.T. See on xi. 42, the only 
place where d-ydinj occurs in Lk. 

For the combination with row purowrw comp. 
i 71 ; Ps. xviiL 18, cvi. 10; and for the fourfold description of 
enmity comp. ver. 22. In Mt v. 44 we have only enemies and 
persecutors according to the best texts; and as /coXoJs Troiew-e TOVS 
pur. fyia? (note the ace.) is not genuine there, this is the only 
passage in which KaXws roictv**" benefit, do good to": comp. 
jcaXaJs ctwetv (ver. 26), and contrast Mt xii, 12 ; ML vil 37 ; Acts 
*- 33; i Cor. vii. 37, 38; PhiL iv. 14; Jas, ii. 8, 19; 2 Pet 
i 19; 3 Jn. 6. Tot$ jucrotW. For the dat comp. TOI$ irpofrJTtus 
(ver. 23) and rots \lruoirpo<t>yTai,$ (ver. 26). See the expansion of 
this principle Rom. xii. 17-21; i Thes. v, 15; i Pet iii. 9. 
Comp. Exod. xxiii. 4; Job xxxi. 29; Prov. xvii. 5, xxiv. 17, 
xxv. 21. See detached note on the relation of Rom. xii.-xiv. to the 
Gospels at the end of Rom. xiii. 

28. euXoyctrc TOU$ KaTapu/xlyous dfia$. In class. Grk. ruAoyetv 
means "praise, honour," whether gods or men : comp. i. 64, ii. 28 ; 
Jas. iiL 9. The meaning "invoke blessings upon " is confined to 
LXX and N.T* (Gen. xiv. 19, xxrL 17, xlviii 9; Rom. xii. 14; 
Acts iii. 26). 

In class. Grk* ampurtfoc is followed by a dat (Horn. Hdt Xen* Dem.). 
as b Ep. Jer. 65 \ but in N.T. by an ace. (Mk. iz. 21 ; Jas. iii, 9) ; and the 
interpolation Mt v. 44* For Tpo<rei5%e<r^e repl we might have expected T/>. 
fo^p, and the MSS. here and elsewhere are divided between forty and repl 
(Gal L 4; CoL i 3 ; Rom. i 8). But comp. Acts viii 15 ; Heb. xiii. 18 } 
Col. iv. 3. Win. xlvil L 2, p. 478. 


iw Tn]paJo*irry $JJL&S. Aristotle defines cTn/peacrftos as C/XTTO- 
Sur/xos rats j8ovXiJo*<nv, ovx tVa rt avnf, aAA* tva /A^ eKtva> (jthet. 
ii. 2. 3). It is " spiteful treatment." 

29, 30* "Whereas w. 27, 28 refer to the active dyefny which returns good 
for evil, these refer rather to the passive fuucpoBvida, which never retaliates. 
The four precepts here given are startling. It is impossible for either govern- 
ments or individuals to keep them. A State which endeavoured to shape its 
policy in exact accordance with them would soon cease to exist ; and if 
individuals acted in stnct obedience to them society would be reduced to 
anarchy. Violence, robbery, and shameless fraction would be supreme. The 
inference is that they are not precepts, but illustrations of principles. They are 
in the form of rules ; but as they cannot be kept as rules, we are compelled to 
look beyond the letter to the spmt which they embody. If Chnst had gh en 
precepts which could be kept literally, we might easily have rested content with 
observing the letter, and have never penetrated to the spirit. What is the spirit ? 
Among other things this : that resistance of evil and refusal to part with our 
property must never be a personal matter : so far as we are concerned we must 
be willing to suffer still more and to surrender still more. It is nght to with- 
stand and even to punish those who injure us : but in order to correct them and 
protect society ; not because of any personal animus. It is right also to with- 
to'd o-3r possessions from those who without good reason ask for them ; but in 
orfor to check idleness and effrontery ; not because we are too fond of our 
possessions to part with them. So far as our personal feeling goes, we ought to 
be ready to oner the other cheek, and to give, without desire of recovery, 
whatever is demanded or taken from us. Love knows no limits but those 
which love itself imposes. When love resists or refuses, it is because com- 
pliance would be a violation of love, not because it would involve loss or 

9* TW TrfirrojTi ere Im t^v eiaytva. A violent blow with the 
fist seems to be meant rather than a contemptuous slap, for 
o-iayuv means "jaw-bone" (Judg. xv. 15, 16; Ezek. xxix. 14; 
Mic. v. 4; Hos. xi. 4). In what follows also it is an act of 
violence that is meant; for in that case the upper and more 
valuable garment (!/wmov) would be taken first In Mt v. 40 the 
spoiler adopts a legal method of spoliation (/cpi^vat), and takes 
the under and less indispensable garment (xwSva) first See on 
iii ii and comp. Jn. xix. 23. 

Here only do we find rfarreuf M c. dot. In class, Grk. & gen** t*g* 
6ri K6ppq$ Tfarrciv or irttTdffffeiv (Plato, Gorg* 486 C, 508 D, 527 A), Some- 
times we have els (Mt xxvii. 30), which some MSS. read here and ruk 13, 
Comp. Xen. Cyr. v. 4. 5. So also KtaKfetp dr6 is not common. Comp. otf 
iri) KuXtfcret r6 funjiJLeiov aftrov <br6 crou (Gen. xxiii. 6) and cnrd troO KU\VWV 
(Xeru Cyr. i. 3. ii, iii. 3. 51). The more usual constr. both in N.T. and 
class. Grk. is either ace. and inf. (rnii. 2 ; Acts xvL 6, xxiv. 23) or ace. of 
pers. and gen. of thing (Acts zxviL 43). Note that afpeev does not mean 
simply "take,** which is ta/^drar, but either "take up" (v. 24, ix. 23) or 
"take away" (xix. 24, xxiii. iS). 

80, wm alrourri o Si'Sou. There is no travri in Mt v. 42, 
and this is one of many passages which illustrate Lk.'s fondness 
for iras (ver. 17, viL 35, ix. 43, xL 4). The vavrl has been 
differently understood. "No one is to be excluded, not even 


one's enemies w (Meyer, Weiss). Omnipetenti te tribue, non omnia 
petenti ; ut id des, quod dare hones te et juste potes (Aug.). Neither 
remark is quite right. Our being able to give juste et \oneste 
depends not only on what is asked, but upon who asks it. Some 
things must not be conceded to any one. Others ought to be 
given to some petitioners, but not to all. In every case, however, 
we ought to be willing to part with what may be lawfully given 
to any. The wish to keep what we have got is not the right motive 
for refusing. 

SiSou, Ktu dir& ToO atporros r& <r& p}) dim ire i. The pres. in all 
three cases implies continual action, making a practice of it 
" Continually give, and from him who continues to take away thy 
goods do not continue to ask them again." For aipav in the sense 
of "take as one's own, appropriate," comp. xi. 52, xix. 21 ; Mk. 
xv. 24. It does not imply that violence is used. But the py 
airaLTt implies that hitherto asking them back has been usual. 
The verb dTratrcZr is peculiar to Lk. in N.T. (xii. 20 : comp. Wisd. 
xv. 8; Ecclus. xx. 15; Hdt i. 3, 2). Prof. Marshall thinks that 
we have here another instance of different translation of the same 
Aramaic, and that LL's aipovros and Mt's Savtto-acrGai may repre- 
sent the same word j also LL's cbrairct and Mt's &rro(rrpa^^ See 
on v. 21 and viii. 15. 

3L icol Ka0oDs 0AeT. The *cu introduces the general principle 
which covers all these cases : " and in short, in a word." How 
would one wish to be treated oneself if one was an aggressor? 
How ought one to wish to be treated? But obviously the principle 
covers a great deal more than the treatment of aggressors and 
enemies. In Tobit iv. 15 we have, "Do that to no man which 
thou hatest" ; but this purely negative precept, which was common 
with the Rabbis, falls immeasurably short of the positive command 
of Christ Isocrates has a vdxrxovr&s v$ Irepwv opyiecr0, ravra 
rots aAAois [df TTotetrc, and the Stoics said, Quod tibi fieri non vis^ 
alteri ne feceris ; and the same is found in Buddhism. In the 
AtSa^, i. 2, and Apost. Const vii 2. i, we have both the positive 
and the negative form. Cod. D, Iren. (iiL 12. 14), Cypr. (Test. 
iiL 119) and other authorities insert the negative form Acts xv. 29. 
How inadequate the so-called Rabbinical parallels to the Sermon 
on the Mount are, as collected by Wunsche and others, has been 
shown by Edersheim (JL & T. 5. p. 531). Note the jcaflok, "even 
as, precisely as " : the conformity is to be exact For 6&eii> Iva 
comp. Mt vii. 12 ; Mk. vi. 25, ix. 30, x. 35 ; Jn. xvii. 24, and see 
on iv. 3. The KO! v/tets before irowtrc is omitted by B and some 
Latin texts. " Do likewise " occurs only here, in. n, and x. 37. 

33-35. Interested affection is of little account : Christian love 
is of necessity disinterested; unlike human love, it embraces what 
is repulsive and repellent 


32. irofo fl/uK x^P l s- "What kind of thank, or favour, have 
you?" This may be understood either of the gratitude of the 
persons loved or of the favour of God. The latter is better, and is 
more clearly expressed by riva /u<r#ov l^cre ; (Mt. v. 46). Other- 
wise there does not seem to be much point in 01 a/mprwAoC For 
\dpis of Divine favour comp. L 30, ii. 40, 52 ; Acts viL 46. 

leal -ydp. " For even M ; nam ettam. Comp. Mt. viii. 9 ; Mk. vii. 28, 
x* 45 ; Jn. iv. 45 ; I Cor. xiL 14 ; and see Ellicott on 2 Thes. iii. 10 ; Meyer 
on 2 Cor. ziiL 4. 

33. Here only is fcya8oiroutv found with an ace. after it It does not 
occur in profane writers, and elsewhere in N.T. is absolute : w. 9, 35 ; Mk. 
iii. 4; I Pet il 15, 20, ill. 6, 17 ; 3 Jn. zz. But in I Pet and 3 Jn. it is 
used of doing what is right as opposed to doing what is wrong, whereas in 
Lk. and Mt it is used, as in LXX, of helping others as opposed to harm- 
ing them: Num. x. 32; Jud xvn. 13 (Cod. B aya8wel); Zeph. i. 12. 
Hatch, B^1>l. Grk. p. 7 ; but see Lft. on Clem. Rom. Cor. m p. 17. 

For djxaprwXoi Mt has in the one case reXwai and in the 
other &htKol. Of course both "publicans" and "heathen" are 
here used in a moral sense, because of their usual bad character ; 
and Weiss confidently asserts that Lk. is here interpreting, while 
Mt. gives the actual words used. But it is possible that Mt., 
writing as a Jew, has given the classes who to Jews were sinners 
KO.T t&xqv instead of the general term. 

34. This third illustration has no parallel in Mt, but see Mt 
v. 42 ; and comp. Prov. xix. 17. 

Savhrqre. The texts are divided between this form, 
and favctferc. In N.T. favlfa is to be preferred to Savetfa, which is the 
class, form. The verb means to "lend upon interest" whereas Kixpqpt 
indicates a friendly loan ; and therefore r& foa would include both interest 
and principal, 

" Receive as their due^ receive back? or perhaps 
"receive in full" comp. cfor^oj in ver. 24, and see Lft on Gal. iv. 
5 \ also Ellicott and Meyer. The phrase AiroX. ret tou need not 
mean more than " receive equivalent services," but more probably 
it refers to repayment in full : comp. cpavifr and avrepaw&o. 

85. irX^K. See on ver. 24. " But^ when this kind of interested 
affection has been rejected as worthless, what must be aimed at is 
this." Note the pres. imperat throughout: " Habitually \wz, do 
good, and lend " ; also that Christ' does not change the word 
Savter, nor intimate that it does not here have its usual meaning 
of lending on interest. 

fjttjSeK dircXmJoires. The meaning of this famous saying de- 
pends partly upon the reading, whether we read fwyScp or 

1 The external evidence stands thus 

ForAM^p dx. AB]LRXT Aetc., Latt Syr-Hard.? Boh. 
For ity&pa dr. KSn*; Syrr. Tisch. is almost alone among recent 
editors in preferring fufi&a. ; WH. and RV. place in the margin, 


but mainly upon the interpretation of cwreXTrt^ovres, All English 
Versions previous to RV. adopt the common view that aTreXir. 
means "hoping for in return," a meaning which is without example, 
but which is supposed to be justified by the context, or rather by 
the corrupted context. Thus Field argues : " No doubt this use of 
the word is nowhere else to be met with ; but the context is here 
too strong for philological quibbks (!). ' If ye lend to them irap* v 
"EAHIZETE 'AIIOAa/Jctv, what thank have ye ? ' Then follows the 
precept : ' Lend pr$\v 'AHEAHIZONTES,' which can by no possi- 
bility bear any other meaning than p^Sev l\ir(t t QVTes aTroXaptlv n 
(Otium Norv. iii. p. 40). The argument would be precarious, even 
if the facts were as stated ; but the true reading is nap &v eXm^ere 
Xafiw (K B L S, Justin), and therefore the whole falls to the ground. 
The usual meaning of aneXTrtfa, " J give up in despair," makes 
excellent sense ; either " despairing of nothing," or " despairing of 
no one " (ja^SeVa). " Despainng of nothing" or " never despairing " 
may mean either " never doubting that God will requite you," or 
"never despairing about your money." The latter meaning is 
almost identical with " despairing of no one," i.e. "never doubting 
that your creditor will pay." But it has been suggested that ^Swa 
may be neut. plur^ on the authority of Steph. Ihesaur. v. col. 962 
[iii. col. 3645]. If this were correct, the two readings would have 
the same meaning. On the authority of a single passage in the 
Anthologla Palatina (ii. 114, p. 325, Brunck), Liddle and Scott 
give cbreXTri&D a transitive meaning, "causing to despair"; but 
there oAAor oLireXirt&v (of an astrologer who said that a person had 
only nine months to live) may mean "giving him up in despair " : 
comp. Polyb. ii. 54. 7. Therefore we may safely abandon the 
common interpretation and render "giving up nothing in despair" 
or " never despairing." Comp. CTT! <tXov cav arracks po/*^>aiav, py 
a-rcA-Tr/or^s (Ecclus. XXiL 2l)j 6 8c airoKaXv\//a$ p,v<rr^pia cwnJATrwre 
(xxvil 2l); ra /car* avrov ounri\irt(ra$ (2 Mac. ix. 1 8), of Antiochus 
when stricken with an incurable disease. Galen often uses the 
verb of desperate cases in medicine; see Hobart, p. 1 18, and Wetst 1 

D and many early Latin texts have nihtt desptrantes. See the valuable 
note in Wordsworth's Vulgate, p. 344. But he thinks it possible that Lk. 
may have written far\vll;eiv for Qwlfcir dr6 on the analogy of faeffQleur for 
te&Uw drb and diroXa.^^ for Xapeuc &v6. 

1 What mischief the common interpretation (sanctioned by the Vulgate, niM 
inde sperantcs} has wrought in Europe is strikingly shown by Dollinger (Aka- 
dcmischc Vbrtragc, L pp. 223ft ; Studies in European History ', pp. 224 ff.). 
On the strength of it Popes and councils have repeatedly condemned the taking 
of any interest whatever for loans. As loans could not be had without interest, 
and Christians were forbidden to take it, money-lending passed into the hands 
of the Jews, and added greatly to the unnatural detestation in which Jews were 
held. The paradox that Christians may not take interest has been revived by 


uiot Vvjrforou. In Mt v. 9 peacemakers are called vW 
<8>ou. The moral likeness proves the parentage. Just as in vo. 
32, 33 Lk. has the generic o/KxproAot where Mt has the specific 
reA-wvat and ldvu<o( 9 so here we have " is kind towards the unthank- 
ful and evil " instead of " maketh His sun to rise on the evil and the 
good, and sendetk rain on the just and the unjust" (Mt. v. 45). 
For *Yi/rrrou comp. i. 32, 35, 76. 

86, 37. A further development of the principle of Christian 
love. Having told His disciples to cherish no personal animus 
against those who injure them, He now warns them against judging 
others respecting any supposed misconduct To pose as a general 
censor morum is unchristian. Censoriousness is a transgression of 
the royal law of love, and an invasion of the Divine prerogatives. 
Not only vengeance but judgment belongs to God. And judgment, 
when it is inevitable, must be charitable (diroXvcrc), directed by a 
desire to acquit rather than to condemn. Comp. i Cor. xiiL 4; 
Jas. iv. n, 12. Hillel said, "Judge not thy neighbour until thou 
comest into his place 77 (Ewald, Hist, of Israel^ vi p. 27). See on 
ver. 31. 

The loose citations of these two verses by Dement of Rome (L 13. 2) and 
Clement of Alexandria (Strom. iL 18, p. 476, ed. Potter) are interesting. Both 
have the words u>s xpijerefictrBc, oflrwy xjnj<rrev$fyrejm &/u immediatehr before 
fj^rptf, JC.T.X. They represent ytvo-6c oUcrtppar& in Lk., for which Justin 
has ybcffOe W x/wjoroi KO! olicrlpfwircj (Try, xcvL; Apol* L 15), Comp. Clem* 
Horn* iiL 57. It is probable that Clem. Alex, here quotes Gem. Rom. uncon- 

88. The transition is easy from charity in judging others to 
benevolence in general. Comp. ver. 30 and iiL n. God remains 
in debt to no man. " He giveth not by measure " (Jn. iii. 34), 
nor does He recompense by measure, unless man serves Him by 
measure. Disciples who serve in the spirit of love make no 
such calculations, and are amply repaid. We are here assured of 
this fact in an accumulation of metaphors, which form a climax. 
They are evidently taken from the measuring of corn, and Bengd 
is clearly wrong in interpreting ws/ocKxiwo/iepov of fluids : ci? rov 
is conclusive. The asyndeton is impressive. 

The form vTepticxyrrbpxvov seems to occur nowhere else, excepting as 
9.1 Joel iL 24. The class, 

O> K^XTTOK dp??. Who shall give ? Not the persons 
benefited, but the instruments of God's bounty. The verb is 
almost impersonal, "there shall be given," So&Jcrerai. Comp. 
alrova-cv (xii. 20) and alTfoowrw (xiL 48). The K<$Xiros is the fold 
formed by a loose garment overhanging a girdle. This was often 
used as a pocket (Exod. iv. 6; Prov. vL 27 ; and esp. Ps. Ixxix. 
12 ; Is. Ixv. 6 ; Jer. xxxtf. 18). Comp. Hdt vi. 125. 5 * Liv. xxL 
18. 10 ; Hor. Sat. iL 3. 172, and other illustrations in Wetst 


yfy> jirpw ficrpciTe. There is no inconsistency, as Weiss 
states (stimmt immtr nicht recht\ with what precedes ; but he is 
right in condemning such interpretations as TO> avr<3 /icrpcp, ov pyv 
Too-ovra) (TheophyL) and eadem mensura in genere sed exuberans 
(Grot) as evasions. The loving spirit uses no measure in its services ; 
and then God uses no measure in requiting. But the niggardly and 
grudging servant, who tries to do just the minimum, receives just 
the minimum in return. In ML iv. 24, 25 we have this saying 
with a different application. 

89. The second half of the discourse begins here, and this is 
marked by a repetition of the introductory Eurev. The connexion 
with what precedes perhaps is, that, before judging others, we must 
judge ourselves ; otherwise we shall be blind leaders of the blind. 
This saying occurs in quite another connexion Mt xv. 14. It 
may easily have been uttered several times, and it is a common- 
place in literature. We are thus shown the manifold application 
of Christ's sayings, and the versatility of truth. See Wetst. on Mt 
rv. 14. With the exception of Mk. xiL 12, the phrase etirev irapo- 
PO\^F is peculiar to Lk. (xiL 16, xv. 3, xviiL 9, xix. u, xx. 19, 
xxL 29). 

els p<$0u WF, " Into a pit * rather than " into the ditch," which 
all English Versions prior to RV. have both here and Mt xv. 14. 
In Mt xii. ii nearly all have "a pit" The word is a doublet of 
J360po$ y puteus^ and is perhaps connected with ftaQfa Palestine is 
full of such things, open wells without walls, unfenced quarries, 
and the like. For oS-j^V comp. Acts viil 31; Jn. xvi 13; Ps. 
xxiv. 5, Ixxxv. n, cxviiL 35 ; Wisd. ix. u, x. 17. 

4O. This again is one of Christ's frequent sayings. Here the 
connexion seems to be that disciples will not get nearer to the 
truth than the teacher does, and therefore teachers must beware of 
being blind and uninstructed, especially with regard to knowledge 
of self. In xxii. 27 and in Jn. xiii. 16 the meaning is that disciples 
must not set themselves above their master. In Mt. x. 24 the 
point is that disciples must not expect better treatment than their 
master. So also in Jn. xv. 20, which was a different occasion. 

Ka-njpTurjjL&os Be iras corai <&$ SbSdoncaXos afi-rou. The sentence 
may be taken in various ways. x. Every well instructed disciple 
shall be as his master (AV.). 2. Every disciple, when he has 
been well instructed, shall be as his master. 3. Every disciple 
shall be as well instructed as his master (Tyn. Cran.). But Per* 
fectus autem omms erit, si sit sicut magister ejus (Vulg.), " Every one 
shall be perfect, if he be as his master " (Rhem.), Wenn derjunger 
tst wU sein Meister^ so ist er vottkommen (Luth.), is impossible. 
The meaning is that the disciple will not excel his master ; at the 
best he will only equal him. And, if the master has faults, the 
iisciple will be likely to copy tb 


For KarapTlttt, ** make Aprtn, equip," comp. Mt iv. 21 ; Mk* i. 19 ; 
I Thes. iii 10 ; GaL vi. I ; Heb. x. 5, ao. 3, xin. ax. It is a surgical word, 
used of setting a bone or joint : for examples see Wetst. on Mt. iv. 21* There 
U no TJ in Mt x. 24, 25 : see on ver. 30. 

41, 42. In order to avoid becoming a blind teacher, whose 
disciples will be no better than oneself, one must, before judging 
and attempting to correct others, correct oneself. Self-knowledge 
and self-reform are the necessary preparation of the reformer, 
without which his work is one of presumption rather than of love. 

Gen. viii. II it is used of the ohve twig brought by the dove. See Wetst on 
, Mt vii. 3. The Srficos is the "bearing-beam, mam beam," that which 
receives (&XO/MU) the other beams in a roof or floor. It u therefore as 
necessarily large as a Kdfxfxn is small. 

"Fix thy mind upon." It expresses prolonged 
attention and observation. Careful consideration of one's own 
faults must precede attention to those of others. The verb is 
specially freq. in Lk. (xiL 24, 27, xx. 23; Acts xL 6, xxviL 39 : 
comp. Heb. iii. i, x. 24; Rom. iv. 19). 

42. iros SuKcwrau X^yciK. " With what face can you adopt this 
tone of smug patronage ? " In Mt viL 4 the patronizing ' 
is wanting. 

*. For the simple subj. after &<piijfu comp. Mt zxviL 49 ; 
Mk. iv. 36. Epict JDtss. L 9. 15, iii. 12. 15. In modern Greek it is the 
regular idiom. Win. xlL 4. b, p. 356. In 06 pX^rrwv we have the only 
instance in Lk. of ob with a participle : " When thou dost not look at, much 
less anxiously consider " (Karavowp] : see small print on i. 20. 

The hypocrisy consists in his pretending to be so 
pained by the presence of trifling evil that he is constrained to 
endeavour to remove it Comp. xiii. 15. That he conceals his 
own sins is not stated ; to some extent he is not aware of them. 
The Tore means "then, and not till then"; and the 8iapXtyei$ is 
neither imperative nor concessive, but the simple future. When 
self-reformation has taken place, then it will be possible to see 
how to reform others. Note the change from fiXtirw to Sia^Ae- 
irovj not merely look at, but "see dearly." In class. Grk. 
8iaj8Ar<a means "look fixedly," as in deep thought Plato notes 
it as a habit of Socrates (Phado, 86 D). 

43. od y<p low. Codex D and some versions omit the y<p, 
the connexion with the preceding not being observed. The con- 
nexion is dose. A good Christian cannot but have good results 
in the work of converting others, and a bad Christian cannot have 
such, for his bad life will more than counteract his efforts to 
reclaim other*. 


The etymological connexion between Kaprfo (carpo, fferbst^ harvest) and 
jcdp^os is by no means certain. But if it is a fact, it has no place here. The 
phrase Tote?? Kapirbv is not classical, but a Hebraism (in. 9, viii. 8, zui* 9 ; Gen. 
L II, 12; Ps. cvu. 37). By ffaxp&v (<T#TW) is meant (i) what is "rotten, 
putnd," and (2) what is " worthless." See WetsL on Mt. vii. 18, A rotten 
tree would produce no fruit ; and fishes just caught would not be putrid (Mt 
xiiL 48). In both places the secondary meaning is required. 

44* The unreformed can no more reform others than thorns 
and briars can produce figs and grapes. It is by their fruits that 
each comes to be known (yivaicr/ccrat). The identification of the 
many Hebrew words which denote thorny shrubs is a hopeless 
task. Neither the originals nor their Greek representatives can be 
satisfactorily determined (Groser, Trees and Plants of the Bibk> 
p. 172). Elsewhere in N,T. /ftxro? is used of the burning bush 
(xx. 37 ; Acts vii. 30, 35 ; Mk. xii. 26 ; Exod, iii 2, 3, 4) : in Horn, 
it is a "thorn-bush, bramble" (Od. xxiv. 230). The verb T/jvyao> 
is specially used of the vintage (Rev. xiv. 18, 19 ; Lev. xix. 10, 
xxv. 5, ii ; Deut xxiv. 21). Comp. the similar sayings Jas. iii 
u, 12, which are probably echoes of Christ's teaching as remem- 
bered by the Lord's brother. 

46. This forms a link with the next section. When men are 
natural, heart and mouth act in concert But otherwise the mouth 
sometimes professes what the heart does not feel 

46-49. The Judgments which await the Members of the King- 
dom. The Sanction or Warning. Mt vii 13-27. This is some- 
times called the Epilogue or the Peroration : but it is not a mere 
summing up. It sets forth the consequences of following, and the 
consequences of not following, what has been enjoined. 

46. The question here asked may be addressed to all dis- 
ciples, none of whom are perfect. The inconsistency of calling 
Him Lord and yet failing in obedience to Him was found even 
in Apostles. What follows shows that the question applies to 
the whole of Christian conduct Of the four parables in the latter 
half of the sermon, the first two (the blind leading the blind ; the 
mote and the beam) have special reference to the work of correct- 
ing others; the third (the good and bad trees) may be either 
special or general; while the fourth (the wise and foolish builders) 
is quite general With KU/HC comp. xiii 25; Mt xxv. n, 12; 
Jas. i 22, 26. 

47* For iras * Ipx^yos see small print on i 66, and for 
see on iii 7 and Fritzsche on Mt iii 7. 

48* loxa\|rK icat tfidQuvev KCU I0T]KK 0ejiAioK. "He dug and 
went deep (not a hendiadys for 'dug deep') and laid a founda- 
tion.*' The whole of this graphic description is peculiar to Lk. 


Robinson stayed in a new house at Nazareth, the owner of which 
had dug down for thirty feet m order to build upon rock (J?es. in 
Pal. iL p. 338). The parables in Mt. and Lk. are so far identical 
that in both the two builders desire to have their houses near a 
water-course, water in Palestine being very precious. In Mt. they 
build on different places, the one on the rock and the other on 
the sand, such as is often found in large level tracts by a dry 
water-course. Nothing is said about the wise builder digging 
through the sand till he comes to rock. Each finds what seems 
to him a good site ready to hand. 

irXtjjx/Arfpus. "A flood," whether from a river or a sea: and 
hence a flood of troubles and the like. See Jos. Ant. ii. 10. 2 
and examples in Wetst Here only in N.T., and in LXX only 
Job xx. 23. 

oflic urxuow "Had not strength to." The expression is a 
favourite one with Lk. (viiL 43, xiil 24, xiv. 6, 29, xvi. 3, xx. 26 ; 
Acts vi. 10, xv. 10, xix. 16, 20, xxv. 7, xxvii. 16). For o-aXeuom 
comp. viL 24, xxi. 26 ; Acts ii. 25 fr. Ps. xv. 8, iv. 31 : freq. in LXX. 

Sia T& KaXflfc olicoSojiTJ<r9at, av-njv. This is certainly the true reading 
(K B L & 33 157, Boh. Syr-Harcl. maig.). The common reading, rcOepcMdrro 
yd/> M T\V vfrpav (ACDXetc.; Latt Syrr. Goth. Arm.), is obviously 
taken from Mt The Ethiopia combines the two readings. 

49. fl jrpoapT)tei' 6 TroTajJw$s. Lk. gives only the main incident, 
the nver, created by the rain, smiting the house. But ML is much 
more graphic: /care/??; ^ PpX*J KC " faQov ol irorajiol xal enrcixrap 

01 2y/XOl K<U irpO<rKO\j/aV TJj Ol/a'f. /CtV#. 

eru^ircaci'. " It fell in," />. the whole fell together in a heap : 
much more expressive thaja fireo-ev, which some texts (A C) here 
borrow from Mt 

ey&ero TO JHJYJJ.GL To harmonize with Trpoo-epyZ cv. This use of 
pijy/ia for " ruin " (so first in Rhem.) seems to be without example. 
In class. Grk. it is used of bodily fractures or ruptures, and also of 
clothes; so also in i Kings xL 30, 31 ; 2 Kings ii. 12. But Amos 
vi. 1 1 of rents in a building, irard^ei rov ot/coy rov peyav BXao-fiacnv, 
Kal rov otKov rov fitKpov pay/wwrw. Hobart contrasts the ftpoxJ}, 
ireo-ey, and wroxns of Mt with the wAiJ/tyivpa, vpocrep- 
i <rwire<rcv, and p%fta of Lk., and contends that the latter 
four belong to medical phraseology (pp. 55, 56). 

The jifya, like peydXy in Mt, comes last with emphasis. 
Divine instruction, intended for building up, must, if neglected, 
produce disastrous ruin. The Kclrai eh irr<5<nv (ii 34} is fulfilled. 
The audience are left with the crash of the unreal disciple's house 
sounding in their ears. 

Similar Rabbinical sayings are quoted, but as coming from pcnons who lived 
after A.D. 100, by which tJT'yf Christ** toM*King had filtered into both Jewish 



and pagan thought. " Whosesoever wisdom is above his works, to what is he 
like? To a tree whose branches are many and its roots few. Then the wind 
cometh and rooteth it up and tumeth it over. And, whosesoever works are 
above his wisdom, to what is he like? To a tree vhose branches are few and 
its roots many. Though all the winds come upon it they move it not from its 
place" (Mishna y Pirqe aboth> III. xxvu.). And again, "To whom is he 
tike, that with many merits uniteth great wisddxn? To him who first layeth 
granite blocks and then bricks. Though ever so mighty floods wash round the 
building, yet they cannot make it give way. But to whom is he like, who 
knoweth much and fulfilleth little ? To him who layeth the foundation with 
bncks, which are disturbed by the least water (Aboth R. Nathan, acdiL). Sec 
Edersiu Z. 6* 71 i. rx 540 ; Nicholson on Mt. vii. 24. 

VH. 1. The division of the chapters is misleading. This 
verse forms the conclusion of the preceding narrative quite in 
LL's manner. Comp. iv. 30, 37, 44, v. n, 16, 26, vi. n, etc. 
It is not the introduction to what follows, for Jesus must have 
been in Capernaum some time before the centurion heard about 
Him. Lk. says nothing about the impression which the discourse 
made upon the people (Mt vii. 28), nor about their following Him 
(Mt. viil i). 

*ErciSt) taXifcwrcx iravra TO. fifcara avrov. This is the only place in 
N.T. in which 4r3tf is used in the temporal sense of "after that, when 
now." Hence "Bird 5t is found in many texts. K has 'Eiretft) M, while D 
has Kai y&ero tfre. In the causal sense of " since, seeing that," Iret&j 
occurs only in Lk. and Paul (xi, 6 ; Acts ziii. 46, xiv. 12, xv. 24 ; I Cor. 
i, 21, 22, xiv. 1 6, rv. 21). See ElLcott on Phil. ii. 26. For 6rXi}pw<re, 
"completed," so that no more remained to be said, comp. Acts xii. 25, 
xiu. 25, xiv. 26, xix. 21. 

els TCLS dicoas TOV Xoov. The e(t marks the direction of what was said : 
comp, L 44, iv. 44 ; Acts xL 22, xvii. 20. Both in bibL Grk. and in class* 
Grk. dtcoj has three senses. I. "The thing heard, report w (i Sam. ii. 24; 
I Kings ii 28; Jn. xii* 3$; Rom. x. 16). 2. "The sense of hearing" 
(2 Sam. xxu. 4, 5; Job. xliL 5; I Cor. xiL 17; 2 Pet ii. 8). 3. "The 
ear" (Mk. vii. 35 ; Heb. v. ii ; 2 Mac, xv. 39). 

2-10. The healing of the Centurion's Servant at Capernaum. 
Mt. viii. 5-13. Mt. places the healing of the leper (Lk. v. 12-14) 
between the Sermon on the Mount and the healing of the cen- 
turion's slave. This centurion was a heathen by birth (ver 9), and 
was probably in the service of Antipas. He had become in some 
degree attracted to Judaism (ver. 5), and was an illustration of the 
great truth which Lk. delights to exhibit, that Gentile and Jew 
alike share in the blessings of the kingdom. The anima naturalifcr 
Christiana of the man is seen in his affection for his slave. 

2. TjjwXXcp reXem-ap. "Was on the point of dying," and would 
have done so but for this intervention (Acts xii. 6, xvi 27, etc.). 
Burton, 73. For Imjxos, "held in honour, held dear," comp. 
xiv. 8; Phil. ii. 29; i Pet ii. 4, 6; Is. xxviii. 16. The fact 
explains why this deputation of elders came. 


8. dir&rrfiXev irpos a&ror irpeerpuT^pous. These elders (no 
article) would be leading citizens ; but they need not be identified 
with the opx^^^aycoyot (viiL 49, xiii. 14; Acts xiii 15, xviii 8, 17), 
as Godet formerly advocated. The compound iicwrrfjeip", "to 
bring safe through," is almost peculiar to Lk. in N.T. (Acts 
xxiii. 24, xxvii 43, 44, xxviii i, 4; Mt xiv. 36 ; i Pet iii 20;. 

4, 01 8c irapayw$jjuei>oi. A favourite verb (ver. 20, yiii 19, 
XL 6, xii. 51, xiv. 21, xix. 16, xxii 52 ; and^ about twenty times in 
Acts) : elsewhere in N.T. eight or nine times, but very fireq. in 

|u$s l<mv cp TOp^Sfl TOVTO. "He is worthy that Thou shooMest do 
this for him " ; 2 sing, rut mid. The reading Tnp# (G P A) is 3 sing, rat 
act and must not be taken as analogous to the exceptional forms ofo, tyet, 
and /3otf\, But beyond doubt rap4g (KABCDRE eta) is the correct 

6. dyair$ yap r& 0Kos I}JMJK. This would hardly be said of one 
who was actually a proselyte. He had learned to admire and 
respect the pure worship of the Jews and to fed affection for the 
people who practised it This would be all the more likely if he 
were in the service of the Herods rather than that of heathen 

TT)J> owaywyV auros <5KoS6*jT)cri' TJfu?. " At his own expense he 
built us our synagogue," the one which we have; not u a syna- 

gogue * ( AV.). Had Capernaum only one synagogue ? 

If TellHAm represents Capernaum, and if the ruins of the synagogue there 
are from a building of this date, they show with what liberality this centurion 
had carried out his pious work. But it is doubtful whether the excellent work 
exhibited in these ruins is quite so early as the first century. The centurions 
appear in a favourable light in N.T. (xxui. 47 ; Acts x. 22, mm. 26, jcriii. 17, 
23, 24, xxiv. 23, xxvru 43). Roman organization produced, and was maintained 
by, excellent individuals, who were a blessing to others and themselves. As 
Philo says, after praising Petronius the governor of Syria, TOP ft dya&ots dyaQfa 
irrrftciv (OIKC yvtipas 6 Qebs Si v ctyeXowre* &<pe\T)6fyrornu (Leg 1 , ad Caium^ 
p. 1027, ed. Gelen.). Augustus had recognized the value of synagogue! m 
ipflfaterrvmgr order and morality. 

6. od |&aKpdK. Comp. Acts xvii 27. ' The expression is 
peculiar to Lk., who is fond of ov with an adj. or adv. to express 
his meaning. Comp. ov TroXXoi (xv. 13 ; Acts L 5^ ov iroXu (Acts 
xxviL 14), OVK oXiyo? (Acts xuu 18, adv. 28, XT. a, xviL 4, ia f 
xix. 23, 24, xxviL 20), ofo 6 ruxo>v (Acts xix. n, xxviii 2), ov 
" ooTflxos (Acts xxi 39), ov /*rp9 (Acts xx, 12). 

2irf*\|fi' <f>t\ous. Comp. xv. 6, Acts x. 24. Mt says nothing about 
either of these deputations, but puts the message of both into the 
mouth of the centurion himself, who comes in person. In Lk. the 
man's humility and faith prevail over his anxiety as soon as he sees 
that the first deputation has succeeded, and that the great Rabbi 


and Prophet is really coming to him. Therefore he sends the 
second deputation to say that he is not worthy of a visit, and that 
the visit is not necessary. 

Ku'pie, HTJ aicrfXXou. "Lord, cease to trouble Thyself" The 
verb is a marked instance of the tendency of words to become 
weaker in meaning: ovcAAu> (ovcvXov, xi. 22) is i. "flay"; 2. 
" mangle "; 3, "vex, annoy" (viii. 49; Mk. v. 35; Mt. ix. 36). 
See Expositor^ ist series, 1876, iv. pp. 30, 31. What follows 
seems to show that the centurion was not a proselyte. The house 
of a Gentile was polluting to a Jew , and therefore ov yap wcavo's 
*/, K.T.X., is quite in point if he was still a heathen. But it is 
rather strong language if he had ceased to be a heathen. For Iva 
after ocai/os see Burton, 216. 

7. clire Xoyw, ical ta0JT<0 6 irais fiou* Lit " Say with a word, 
and let my servant be healed." The word is to be the instrument 
with which the healing is to take place, instead of Jesus' coming in 
person: comp. Acts ii. 40 and Gal. vi. n. There is no doubt 
that o THUS /tov means " my servant" This use is found in N.T. 
(xii. 45, xv. 26 ; Mt viiL 6, 8, 13), and is very freq. in LXX and in 
class. Grk. 

It has been contended that in Mt viii. 6, 8, 13 raty must mean "son," 
because the centurion calls his servant floOXos in ver. 9 : as if it were improbable 
that a person in the same conversation should speak sometimes of his " servant " 
and sometimes of his "boy." In both narratives wats and foOXos are used as 
synonyms ; and it is gratuitous to suppose that in using oOAos Lk. has misin- 
terpreted the TCUS in the source which he employed. Comp. xv, 22, 26. Here 
6 rats fiov is more affectionate than & 8ou\6s JJLOV would have been* 

8. ly& acOponros elju fiiro ifcuviav Tacro-fyeyos. The et/u 
must not be united with TOO-O-O//,VO$ and made the equivalent of 
Tcuro-o/wu : Tocr<ro/4^os is adjectival. Thus, " For I am a man who 
is habitually (pres. part.) placed under authority." But, " For I 
am an ordinary person (ctv0pa>7ros), and a person in a dependent 
position " is rather an exaggeration of the Greek. Comp. faro TTJV 
rov /3ao-iAea>s cov(riav Trecrctv (2 Mac, iii. 6). The K<U yap shows 
the intimate connexion with what precedes, ewrc Aoyo> KOL laO^o) : 
see on vi. 32. " I know from personal experience what a word 
from one in authority can do. A word from my superiors secures 
my obedience, and a word from me secures the obedience of my 
subordinates. Thou, who art under no man, and hast authority 
over unseen powers, hast only to say a word and the sickness is 
healed." Perhaps aV0/>awros hints that Jesus is superhuman* 
Evidently &ro c^oiwnav racnro/Avos means that, if an inferior can 
give effective orders, much more can a superior do so. It is the 
certainty of tie result without personal presence that is the point 

9. 6 "ITJCTOUS lOarfjAcurev afrroV. This is stated in both narratives 
Comp. Mk* vi & Those who are unwilling to admit any limita- 


tions in Christ's knowledge have to explain how wonder is com- 
patible with omniscience. One limitation is clearly told us by 
Himself (Mk. xiii. 32); so that the only question is how far such 
limitations extend. See on ii. 46, 52, and xvii. 14. Note the 
solemn Ay fyuc, and comp. ver. 28, x. 12, 24, xL 8, 9, 51, etc. 

ofiBc Iv T *I<rpa$]X TocrcujTqv itivrw cupov. This again points CO 
the centurion being still a heathen. Nowhere among the Jews had 
He found any one willing to believe that He could heal without 
being present. It is natural that Lk. should express this preference 
for a Gentile more strongly than Mt, who has irap ovSevl roo-avnyv 
7rmv kv T< 'lo-pa^X cvpov. Lk. here omits the re/narkable passage 
Mt viii. 11, 12; but he gives it in quite a different connexion 
xiii. 28, 29. Such teaching, so necessary and so unwelcome to the 
Jews, may easily have been repeated 

10. uiroorpeij/airres. See on i. 56 and iv. 14. Lk/s fiyiaiVon-a is 
stronger than the IdBvj of Mt. The servant was not only cured, but 
"in good health." Non modo sanum^ sed sanitate utentem (Beng.) 
Hobart remarks that Lk. " is the only N.T. writer who uses vyiawtw 
in this its primary sense, ' to be in sound health,' with the exception 
of S. John, 3 Ep. 2. For this meaning it is the regular word in 
the medical writers " (p. 10). See on v. 31 and comp. xv. 27. 
Here and v. 31 Vulg. has sanus; in xv. 27, salvus. 

The identification of this miracle with that of the healing of the son of the 
royal official (pa<rt\tKbf) in Jn, iv. is not probable : it involves an amount of 
misinfonnation or carelessness on one side or the other which would be very 
startling. Irenseus seems to be in favour of ft ; but ** centurion " with him may 
be a slip of memory or a misinterpretation of /3a<nXic&. Ongen and Chrysostom 
contend against the identification. Is there any difficulty in supposing that on 
more than one occasion Jesus healed without being present? The difficulty is 
to explain one such instance, without admitting the possession of supernatural 
powers: this Strauss has shown, and the efforts or Keim and Schenkel to 
explain it by a combination of moral and psychical carases are not satisfying. 
There is no parallel to it in O.T., for (as Keim points cart) the healing of 
Naaman is not really analogous. 

11-17. The Raising of the Widow's Son at Nain. Because 
Lk. alone records it, its historical character has been questioned. 
But there were multitudes of miracles wrought by Christ which 
have never been recorded in detail at all (iv. 23, 40, 41, vi 18, 19 ; 
Jn. ii. 23, iv. 45, vii. 31, xii 37, xx. 30, xxL 25), and among these, 
as ver. 22 shows, were cases of raising the dead We must not 
attribute to the Evangelists the modern way of regarding the raising 
of the dead as a miracle so amazing, because so difficult to perform^ 
that every real instance would necessarily become widely known, 
and would certainly be recorded by every writer who had knowledge 
of it To a Jew it would be hardly mo**e marvellous than the heal- 
ing of a leper; and to one who believes in miracles at all, dis- 
tinctions as to difficulty are unmeaning It is not unreasonable to 


suppose, either that this event never came to the knowledge of the 
other Evangelists, or that, although they knew of it, they did not 
see the necessity for recording it. It is worth noting that nearly all 
recorded instances of raising the dead were performed for women 
(i Kings xvii. 23; 2 Kings iv. 36] Jn. XL 22, 32; Acts ix. 41; 
Heb. XL 35). 

UU Ir T<J> 4Sij. It is not easy to decide between the reading iv 
se. XP&'V (A B R), and iv TV #775, sc. tu^pa ( C D). On the one hand, Lk. 
elsewhere, when he writes iv r<, has KaGe^s (viii. i) ; on the other, when he 
writes TQ e?)j, he does not prefix iv (ix. 37 ; Acts xxi. i, xxv. 17, xxvu. 18). 
The less definite would be more likely to be changed to the more definite than 
vice versa. Thus the balance both of external and internal evidence is in 
favour of iv r$ e^s, and we must not limit the interval between the miracles 
to a single day. In N.T. e{?5s is peculiar to Lk. (ix. 37 ; Acts XXL I, xxv. 17, 
xxvii. 18) So also is & s rnytvev (v 12, xv. 25, \i\. 29, 41 ). 

The place is not mentioned elsewhere in Scripture ; and 
the village of that name in Josephus (JB. J. iv. 9. 4) is on the other 
side of the Jordan, and cannot be the same. 

A hamlet called Nein was found by Robinson about two miles west of 
Endor, on the north slope of Little Hermon, which is where Eusebius and 
Jerome place it ; and it would be about a day's journey from Capernaum. 
" One entrance alone it could have had, that which opens on the rough hillside 
in its downward slope to the plain " (Stanley^ Stn, 6 Pal. p. 357) ; so that the 
very path on which the two companies met can be identified. About ten 
minutes' walk on the road to Endor is a burying-place which is still used, and 
there are many tombs cut in the rock. Robinson, Pal. iii. p. 469 ; Bibl. Res. 
iL 361 ; Thomson, Land 6* Book, p. 445 ; Tnstram, Land of Israel, p. 127. 
The expression, ir6\iv Ka\ovfiiv^v Kafo, looks as if Lk. were writing for those 
who were not familiar with the country ; comp. i 26, 39, iv. 31. See on vi 15. 

ol jMi07jTcu aurou. Including more than the Twelve; vi 13. 
See on xL 29. 

12. ical ISoft |icofucTo T60H|K(fe. *' Behold there was being 
carried out a dead man." Or, "there was being carried out dead 
the only son," etc. The /ecu' introduces the apodosis of As & 
ijyyio^ and must be omitted in translation : "then " would be too 
strong. See on v. 12. The compound verb occurs here only in 
N.T. and nowhere in LXX. It is equivalent to iK<f>cpiv (Acts v. 
6, 9, 10) and efferre^ and is used of carrying out to burial, Polyb. 
xxxv. 6.2; Plut AgiSy xxi. ; Cic. xlii. In later Gk. oc/co/uSi; is 
used for K<[>opd of burial. With TC^KWS comp. Jn. xi. 44. 

fjbowyt>$)s 0105 TJJ jMjTpt ofirou. Comp. viii. 42, ix. 38; Heb. 
iL 17; Judg. xL 34; Tobit iuL 15, viii. 17. Only in Jn. is/wvo) ' 
used of the Divine Sonship (i. 14, 18, iii. 16, 18; i Jn. iv. 9). 

icoX aWj fy x^P a * Tiie $* lfoa y safely be pronounced to be certainly 
genuine (KBCLSVg and most Versions). For an} some editors write 
0nr, and a few authorities have o2 afrg %-fipo. The mourning of a widow 
4oc an only ion is typical for the extremity of grief: trbacumJUt imicum 


mater (Calull. mix. 5). Camp. Jer, vi. 26 ; Amot viii. ro; ZecL, m 10; 
Prov. iv. 3, 

oxXos rijs inSXews lfeap$. Some of this multitude would be hired 
mourners, and musicians with flutes and cymbals. The mother 
would walk in front of the bier, and Jesus would naturally address 
her before touching it. This use of i*avo9 for "enough and to 
spare, much," is specially freq, in Lk. (viii. 27, 32, xx. 9, xxiL 38, 
xxiii. 8, 9; Acts viii. n, ix. 23, 43, xL 24, 26, etc.). It is possibly 
colloquial : it occurs in Aristoph. Pax 354. See Kennedy, Sources 
of N.T. Grk. p. 79. D here has TroArfs. 

18. xai ibv aur^v $ Kuptos l<nr\ayvurQri Iv* afrrfj. The introduc- 
tion of o Kvpw has special point here : it is the Lord of Life meet- 
ing sorrow and death. The expression is characteristic of Lk. 
Comp. xxiv. 34, and see on v. 17. Compassion is elsewhere men- 
tioned as a moving cause in Christ* s miracles (Mt xiv. 14, xv. 32, 
xx. 34 ; Mk. L 41, viii. 2). The verb is peculiar to the Synoptists ; 
and, excepting in parables (Lk. x, 33, xv. 20; Mt xviii. 27), is 
used of no one but Christ It is followed, as here, by M c. daf. 
Mt xiv. 14; and by wtpt c. gen. Mt ix. 36; but generally by 
farf c. ace. (Mt xv. 32; Mk vi 34, viii 2, ix. 22). 

M$| icXaie. " Do not go on weeping, cease to weep w : comp. 
ver. 6. He is absolutely sure of the result ; otherwise the command 
would have been unnatural Quis matrem, nisi mentis inops> in 
funere nati Flere vttatl 

14. ^aro rfjs cropou, ot 8^ pcurnf^onres ccrnjarar. Lk. clearly 
intimates that the purpose of the touching was to make the bearers 
stand still At such solemn times words are avoided, and this 
quiet sign sufficed. Perhaps it also meant that Jesus claimed as 
His own what Death had seized as his prey. Lk. equally clearly 
intimates that the resurrection was caused by Christ's command. 
This is the case in all three instances of raising the dead (viii. 54 ; 
Jn. xi. 43). The <ropos may be either the bier on which the body 
was carried, or the open coffin (probably wicker) in which it was 
laid (Gen. L 26; Hdt L 68. 3, il 78. i). 

It is worth noting that currdeir, which occurs twenty-seven times in 
N.T. (x. 4, xL 27, xiv. 27, xxii. 10, etc;), is found only once in LXX. 

<r<uXfy. " To the I say, Arise." To the mother He had said, 
" Weep not" The <rot is emphatic. For this use of Xcyw, almost 
in the sense of " I command," comp. XL 9, xiL 4, xvi. 9. 

15. dKK<9jri> 6 reKpos. The verb occurs only here and Acts 
ix. 40 in N.T. ; in both cases of persons restored to life and sitting 
up. Not in LXX. In this intrans. sense it is rare, excepting in 
medical writers, who often use it of sick persons sitting up in bed 
(Hobart, p. n). The speaking proved complete restoration. 


that the young man was in a trance does not get rid of the 

miracle. Triow did Jesus know that he was in a trance, and know exactly how 
to rouse him ? And can we suppose that this happened on three different occa- 
sions, even if we could reconcile Christ's action with a character for truthfulness? 
Here and in the case of Jairus* daughter it is the Evangelist who tells us that the 
person was dead ; but Jesus Himself declared that Lazarus was dead (Jn. xi, 14). 
We are told that the symmetry of the three instances is suspicious ; raised from 
the death-bed, raised from the bier, raised from the tomb* But no Evangelist 
gives us the triplet. Lk* is the only writer who records more than one, and the 
two which he records he places in unsymmetrical order, the raising from the bier 
coming before the raising from the death-bed. Strauss has shown how unsatis- 
factory the trance theory is (Lebfnjcsu, ed. 1864, p. 469). 

rg pirpu The sudden change of nominative 
causes no obscurity. Comp. xiv. 5, xv. 15, xvii. 2, xix. 4 ; Acts vi. 
6, x. 4. Jesus might have claimed the life which He has restored, 
nam juvenis jam desierat csse matris sua ; but compassion for the 
mother again influences Him. Comp. ix. 55 ; Acts ix. 41 ; i Mac 
x. 9 ; i Kings xvii. 23 ; 2 Kings iv. 36. 

16. *E\apv $ <|>6po$ tr&vras. It is natural that this should be 
the first feeling on seeing a corpse reanimated. But a writer of 
fiction would rather have given us the frantic joy of the mother 
and of those who sympathized with her. Comp. i. 65, v. 8, 26, 
viil 37 ; Acts ii. 43, xix. 37. See on L 12, and also Schanz, ad he. 

Xfyoires on . . . Kal OTU It is very forced to make oVi in 
both cases argumentative : " Saying, (We praise God) because 
. . . and because." It is possible to take the second 6Vi in this 
way ; but the common method of making both to be recitative is 
preferable. Both, therefore, are to be omitted in translation, the 
words quoted being in the oratio recta (Tyn. Cran. Cov. RV.). 
Cases in which on may be taken either way are freq. in N.T. 
(L 45, ii. ii, iv. 36, vil 39, ix. 22, x. 21, xi. 38, xxii. 70 ; i Jn. ii 
12-14, etc.). 

*Eir<rK^4raTo 6 8eo$ TOV Xaou a&rou. Comp. L 68, 78 ; Acts xv. 
14 ; Heb. iL 6. The verb was specially used of the " visits " of a 
physician. Comp. Mt xxv. 36, 43 ; Jas. i. 27 ; Acts VL 3, viL 23, 
xv. 36, the only other passages in N.T. in which the word occurs. 
In the sense of visiting with judgment or punishment it is never 
used in N.T. and but seldom in LXX (Ps. Ixxxviii. 33 ; Jer. ix. 9, 
25, XL 22, Ii. 29). After the weary centuries during which no 
Prophet had appeared, it was indeed a proof of Jehovah's visiting 
His people that one who excelled the greatest Prophets was among 
them. No one in O.T. raised the dead with a word. 

17. ctj\6i> 6 X<$yo$ oSros IK O\TJ rfi 'louSeu^ irepl afrrou. The 
Xoyos is the one just mentioned, that God had visited His people 
in sending a mighty Prophet The statement does not imply that 
Lk. supposed Nain to be in Judaea, lov&ua here probably means 
Palestine : see on iv, 44 and xxui. 5. But even if we take it in the 


narrower sense of Judasa as distinct from Galilee, Samaria, and 
Persea, there is no need to attribute to Lk. any geographical in- 
accuracy. "This saying went forth (from Nain and circulated) 
in Judaea"; Le. it reached the headquarters of Christ's opponents. 
For irepl afrrou comp. V. 15* 

This pregnant use of a prep* of rest after a verb of motion is perhtjpa 
found only in late Grk., for in Thuc. iv. 43. 3 and Xen. Hellen. viL 5. 10 the 
readings vary between drjferar and drfra*. Comp. viii. 7, and see 'Win. L 
4- a, p. 514. 

KOI ircitnj TJJ irpix<$p<5>- Note the position of this dause, which 
is added after 7rpt avrov with augmented force: "and (what is 
more) in all the region round about " ; Lc. round about "lovSoio, 
not Nain, Comp. Acts xxvi. 23. The verse prepares the way for 
the next incident by showing how the Baptist's disciples came to 
hear about "all these things." 

The evidence that J&us raised the dead is that of all four Gospels and of 
primitive tradition. The fact seems to have been universally believed in the 
early Church (Justin, ApoL L 22. 48; Try. Ixix.; Ong. c. Cels. iL 48). 
Quadratus, one of the earliest apologists, who addressed a defence of Christianity 
to Hadnan A.D. 125, says in the only fragment of it which is extant, " But the 
works of our Saviour were always present, for they were true ; those that were 
healed and those that were raised from the dead, who were seen not only when 
they were healed and when they were raised, but were also always present ; and 
not merely while the Saviour was on earth, but also after His departure, they 
were there for a considerable time, so that some of them lived even to our own 
times " (Bus. H. E. iv. 3. 2). This does not mean that Quadratus had seen 
any of them, but that there was abundance of opportunity, long after the event, 
to inquire into the reality of these miracles. 5. Paul uses the same kind of 
argument respecting the resurrection of Christ (l Cor. xv. 5-8). Weiss points 
out how unsatisfactory are all the attempts to explain the evidence on any 
other hypothesis than the historical fact that Jesus raised the 

i. pp. 557-565, Eng. tr. ii. 178-186). He concludes thus: "In no other 
miracle did the grace of God, which appeared in His Messiah, manifest itself so 
gloriously, by overcoming the consequences of sin and thereby giving a pledge 
for the highest consummation of salvation." See Aug. Injoh* Trac. xlix. 2* 

18-86. The message from the Baptist to the Christ Peculiar 
to Lk. and Mt, who place it in different connexions, but assign to 
it the same occasion, viz. that John had "heard in his prison the 
works of the Christ " (Mt xL 2). Lie's narrative, as usual, is the 
more full He does not mention that John is in prison, having 
already stated the fact by anticipation (iii so). The vepl TOVTW* 
Touro)v shows that the works reported to the Baptist indude the 
healing of the centurion's servant and the raising of the widow's son* 

irpfo r&y icvpioy* This is probably the true reading (B L RX, a fi^ Vulg.) 
lather than vpbt rb 'Iipofo (X AXT, bcf). See on ver. 13. 

19. Xd el 6 px<$jiKo$; "Art Thou (in emphatic contrast to 
He that cometh," f>. whose coming is a matter of quite 
notorious certainty (iil 16, xiiL 35, six. 38 ; Heb. x. 37), 


*1 IrepoK irpexrSoKwfJLcv ; " Or must we loc k for another, different 
in kind?" whereas oXXov might be anothei of the same kind (LflL 
on Gal. i. 6, 7). The reading crcpov ( B L R X B) is right, and is 
not taken from Mt It is oAW (A D) that is the corruption. 
For the delib. subj. comp. iii. 10, 12, 14. See oniii. 15. 

The meaning of the question thus sent to Christ has been 
much discussed, i. Chrystostom and other Fathers have sug- 
gested that the question was asked for the sake of John's disciples^ 
who needed strengthening or correcting in their beliefs. See 
Oxford Library of the Father s> x. p. 267, note c. Luther, Calvin, 
Beza, Grotius, Bengel, and others adopt this view. But the whole 
context is against it Christ's reply is addressed to John, not to 
the disciples; and it is not clear that the disciples even under- 
stood the message which they carried. 2. Weiss and other critics 
follow Tertullian (Marrion. iv. 18) in contending that John's own 
faith was failing, because the career of Jesus did not seem to 
correspond with what he and the people had expected, and with 
what he had foretold (iii. 17). There is nothing incredible in this 
view ; but the Baptist had had such a long and stern preparation 
for his work, and had received such convincing evidence that Jesus 
was the Messiah, that a failure in his faith is surprising. 3. Hase 
and others suggest that he was not failing in faith, but in patience. 
John was disappointed that Jesus did not make more progress, 
and he wished to urge Him on to take a more prominent and 
indisputable position, " If Thou do these things, manifest Thyself 
unto the world.** Perhaps John was also perplexed by the fact 
that one who could work such miracles did not set His forerunner 
free, nor " cleanse His threshing-floor " of such refuse as Antipas 
and Herodias. This view suits the context better than the second. 
John's sending to Jesus is strong evidence that he was not seriously 
in doubt as to His Messiahship. For a false Christ would not 
have confessed that he was false ; and what proof could the true 
Christ give more convincing than the voice from heaven and the 
visible descent of the Spirit? 4. The view of Strauss, that John 
had just begun to conjecture that Jesus is the Messiah, and that 
therefore this narrative is fatal to the story of his having baptized 
Jesus and proclaimed Him as the Messiah, is answered by 
Hase (Gesch. Jesu> 39, p. 388, ed. 1891). See also Hahn, L 


21. OcpaireJctv &ro. See on v. 15 ; it is peculiar to Lk. 

liaarfy&m "Distressing bodily diseases"; ML iii. 10, v. 29, 
34. In LXX it is used of any grievous trouble, but not specially 
of disease: Ps. rxxv. 15, Ixxxviil 32 j Ecdus. xL 9; 2 Mac, vil 
37 : comp. Horn. //. xii. 37, xiiL 81* ; Aesch. Sept. 607 ; Ag. 642, 
The notion that troubles are Divine chastisements is implied in 
the word. It is used literally Acts xxiL 24 and Heb. XL 36. 


"He graciously bestowed, made a free present 
of*' ; magnificum wrbum (Beng.); comp. 2 Mac. iil 31. 

22. dirayyeiXaTe *|M^CU See on viii. 20. The answer is ex- 
pressly sent to John : there is no intimation that it is for the in- 
struction of his disciples, who are sent back, " like the messenger 
from Gabii to Sextus Tarquinius," to relate a symbolical narrative, 
which their master is to interpret. That they can understand it is 
neither stated nor implied. 

Tu<j>\oi dyapX^rouoriK, K.T.\. There is probably a direct reference 
to Is. xxxv. 5, 6, bti. i. It is clear, not only that Lk. and Mt 
understand Jesus to refer to bodily and not spiritual healings, but 
that they are right in doing so. John's messengers had not " seen 
and heard " Christ healing the spiritually blind and the morally 
leprous. Moreover, what need to add irr^xol evayyeXtf ovrat, if all 
that precedes refers to the preaching of the good tidings ? It is 
unnatural to express the same fact, first by a series of metaphors, 
and then literally. All the clauses should be taken literally. They 
seem to be arranged in two groups, which are connected by KO^ 
and in each group there is a climax, the strongest item of evidence 
being placed last 

TTTwxol euayycXitomrai. This was the clearest sign of His being 
the Christ (Is. Ixi. i), as He Himself had declared at Nazareth (iv. 
18-21). His miracles need not mean more than that He was "a 
great Prophet " ; moreover, the Baptist had already heard of them. 
But it was a new thing that the poor, whom the Greek despised 
and the Roman trampled on, and whom the priest and the Levite 
left on one side, should be invited into the Kingdom of God (vl 
20). For the passive sense of tvayyeXi&crOai comp. Heb. iv. 2, 6, 
and see Win. xxxix. i. a, p. 326, and Fntzsche on Mt. vi. 4. For 
euayeXXiov see on Rom. i. i. 

23. paicrfpios. Not paxapLoi, as it would have been if the 
direct reference were to the disciples of John. It implies that 
the Baptist had in some way found an occasion of stumbling in 
Jesus (/.<?. he had been wanting in faith, or in trust, or in patience) ; 
and it also encourages him to overcome this temptation. 

crKai/8aXur6. Only here and xvii. 2 in Lk., but frequent in 
Mt and Mk. Tht verb combines the notions of " trip up " and 
" entrap," and hi N.T. is always used in the figurative sense of 
" causing to sin." See on xvii. i. This record of a rebuke to the 
Baptist is one of many instances of the candour of the Evangelists. 
For 8$ Idv see Greg. JProleg. p. 96, and Win. xli. 6, p. 390 ; this 
use of lav for av is common in LXX and N.T. (xvii. 33?; Mt v. 
19, 32, xiL 32, xviiL 5 ; Jas. iv. 4). 

24. ircpl 'lodpou. This is further evidence that the question and 
answer just recorded concerned John himself. The people had 
heard Jesus send a rebuke to the Baptist But He forthwith 


guards them from supposing that John has ceased to be worthy of 
reverence. He waits till his disciples are gone ; because if they 
had heard and reported Christ's praise of John to their master, it 
might have cancelled the effect of the rebuke. This panegyric is 
almost the funeral oration of the Baptist ; for soon after this he 
was put to death. For JJP&ITO see on iv. 21. 

Tt ^X6art. In each of the three questions it is possible to put the 
note of interrogation before the infinitive, and render, " "Why went ye out? to 
behold?" etc. But the order of the words favours the usual punctuation, 
Perhaps Betoatrfa implies " behold " with wonder and admiration. 

The literal meaning makes ex- 
cellent sense: "Did you go out into the wilderness to admire 
what you would certainly find there, but which would have no 
interest or attraction ? Or did you go out to see what would no 
doubt have been interesting and attractive, but which you were 
not likely to find there?" But it also makes good sense to in- 
terpret, "Had John been a weak and fickle person, you would 
not have made a pilgrimage to see him." 

25. oLvQpwvov & fiaXaicois. Such a person would not be found 
in the wilderness; although he might have attracted them. -This 
seems to show that the KoXd/jiov is not metaphorical, for this is 
obviously literal. 

ol Iv tfitmo-jiw epSoJo) icat rpu<|>$ ihrdpxoires. " Those who live 
in gorgeous apparel and luxury." The word fytaTwrjuos is of late 
origin, and is seldom used excepting of costly vesture (ix. 29; 
Acts xx, 33 ; Jn. xix, 24 ; i Tim. ii. 9 ; Gen. xxiv. 53 ; Exod. iii. 
22, xii 35; i Kings x. 5). See Trench, Syn. L For i^8d|w 
comp. xiii. 17, and for i5Tr<ipxo>T$ see on viii. 41. In N.T. rpv<j>y 
occurs only here and 2 Pet ii. 13 ; in LXX only as v.L Lam. iv. 5. 
But it is freq. in class. Grk. It means an enervating mode of life 
(0/3V7rro/u, " I am broken up and enfeebled *). 

26. TTpwnro t Tpo>' Trpo<f>^Tou. This completes the climax : /coXa- 

fJLOV, aV0p<lHTOV, -JTpO^^TTJV, 7TptflTO"OTpOl/ -jrpO^lJrOV. In TTCplOXTOTCpOV 

we have a late equivalent of irXiov. It may be masc. or neut., 
but is probably neut, like ir\ov in xL 32. Comp. xii. 4, xx. 47. 
They went out to see something more than a Prophet, and they 
did see it 

27. This quotation from Makchi (iiL i) is given by Mk. at the 
opening of his Gospel coupled with <|>a>i^ pofiirros, K.T.X., and 
attributed as a whole to Isaiah. Neither Heb. nor LXX has irp& 
Trpoo-oSirou aoo, which Mt ML and Lk. all insert in the first clause. 
See on ix. 52. Moreover, they all three have aTrovreXXw and 
KarcurKevwrei instead of the airooveXhw and emfiXtyerai of LXX. 
See on iv. 18. The passage was one of the common-places of 
Messianic prophecy, and had been stereotyped in ar independent 
Greek form before the Evangelists made use of it 


28. iv yemjTots yuwuKoi>>. A solemn periphrasis for the whole 
human race ; that it implies weakness and frailty is not evident : 
in Job xiv. i these qualities are expressed. It is human generation 
as distinct from heavenly regeneration that is meant John's 
superiority lay, not in his personal character, but in his office and 
mission: the glory of being the immediate forerunner of the 
Messiah was unique. He was a Prophet, like Moses and Elijah ; 
yet he not only prophesied, but saw and pointed out to others 
Him of whom he prophesied. Lk. omits the Hebrew 

The word xpo^njj is an interpolation. The external evidence against 
it is immense ( B K L M X g^ and most Versions), and it is improbable that 
the possibility of Prophets outside Israel would be indicated. 

6 8 jiiKpoVcpos. There is no need to make this a superlative, 
as AV. alone among English Versions: better, "he that is in- 
ferior," i.e. less than other members of the Kingdom, less than 
any among the more insignificant It is most unnatural to explain 
6 fUKporepos of Christ. Chrysostom says, irepl lavrou Xeycov t/coTCi>s 
KpvTTTci TO irpovwrov &a TIJV ert Kparcwrav farovotav real Bio, TO p,rj 
&>(u Trepi lavrov fteya n Xevetv (Horn, xxxvii. p. 417), and above 
he explains /u/cporepos as Kara T^V ipA/joa? /cat KOLTCL Tip T&V woAAaiy 
$6av (p. 416). Much the same view is taken by Hilary, Theophy- 
lact, Erasmus, Luther, Fritzsche, and others. In that case ev TQ 
/JcwrtAeip rov o9 must be taken after pti&v, which is awkward ; 
and we can hardly suppose that Jesus would have so perplexed 
the people as to affirm that He was inferior to the Baptist, who in 
all his teaching had enthusiastically maintained the contrary (nL 
16; Mt iii. n; Mk. L 7; Jn. i. 15, 20, 27, 30, iiL 28-30). By 
his office John belonged to the old dispensation ; he was its last 
and highest product (major prophetd,, quia finis propfytarum), but 
he belonged to the era of preparation. In spiritual privileges, in 
grace, and in knowledge any even of the humbler members of the 
Kingdom are superior to him. He is a servant, they are sons ; he 
is the friend of the Bridegroom, they are His spouse. It is 
possible to understand 'law^ou after /u/cpdVepos, but it is unnecessary: 
more probably the comparative refers to others in the Kingdom. 
The paradox, " He that is less than John is greater than John," is 
capable of interpretation ; but the principle that the lower members 
of a higher class are above the highest member of a lower class is 
simpler. The superlative of /xwepos does not occur in N.T. 

29, 30. Many have supposed that these two verses are a 
, parenthetical remark of the Evangelist But a comment inserted 
in the middle of Chrisf s words, and with no indication that it is 
a comment, is without a parallel and improbable. Jn. iiL 16-21 
and 31-36 are not parallel There the question is whether com- 
ment is added. In both passages it is probable that there is no 


comment But, assuming that the Evangelist is in both cases 
commenting, he appends his comment : he does not insert it into 
the utterances of others. Here w. 29 and 30 are part of Christ's 
address, who contrasts the effect which John's preaching had 
upon the people and upon the hierarchy (see Schanz). The con- 
nexion between ver. 30 and ver. 31 is close, as is shown by the ovv. 

29* iras 6 Xaos dicou'cras. " All the people, when they heard " the 
preaching of the Baptist Note the iras, and see small print on i. 66* 

fcSiKauiKrai' TOK eccv, pairn<r0&Ts. "Admitted the righteous- 
ness of God (in making these claims upon them and granting them 
these opportunities) by being baptized." Their accepting baptism 
was an acknowledgment of His justice. See on ver. 35, and the 
detached note on the word SI/HUDS and its cognates, Rom. L 17. 

80. ol POJUKOU Lk, often uses this expression instead of oi 
y/xx/i^uxret?, which might be misleading to Gentile readers (x 25, 
xi. 45, 46, 52, xiv. 3). Elsewhere in NT. the word occurs only 
Mt xxii 35; Tit iii. 9, 13. Comp. 4 Mac. v. 4; Corp. Inscr. 
2787, 8. 

TTJK pou\$]v Tou.eeoG ^Qirtivav els lauroife. "They frustrated 
the counsel of God concerning themselves " : comp. cfe ^aas in 
i Thes. v. 1 8. The rendering, "for themselves, so far as they 
were concerned, they rendered the counsel of God effectless," 
would require T& cfe lawovs. The verb is a strong one : "render 
aflerov, placeless, Inefficacious " (GaL il 21, iil 15 ; Jn. xil 48 ; Lk, 
x. 1 6). Free will enables each man to annul God's purpose for 
his salvation. The phrase TTJK POU\^ TOU 0cou is peculiar to Lk. 
in N.T, (Acts xiii. 36, xx. 27 ; comp. ii. 23, iv. 28). It occurs 
Wisd. vL 4 ; comp. Ps. xxxii 1 1, cvi. 1 1 ; Prov. xix. 2 1. With jjrfj 
comp. the case of Nicodemus (Jn. iii. 4, 5). 

31. The spurious reading ctre W 6 Ktf/uo? was interpolated at the be- 
ginning of this verse to mark w. 29, 30 as a parenthetical remark of the 
EvangeUst. Owing to the influence of the Vulgate the interpolation was 
followed by all English Versions pnor to RV. Almost all MSS. and ancient 
versions omit the words. But their spunousness must not be quoted as 
evidence against the view which they support Many false readings are 
correct glosses upon the true text, although that is probably not the cue 

08? 6jjtoiScro>. The o5v would not be very intelligible if 
w. 29, 30 were omitted; but after ver. 30 it is quite in place. 
" Seeing that the rulers and teachers have rejected the Divine in- 
vitation given by John, and that ye (Acyerc, ver. 34) follow them 
in refusing to follow Me, to what, then, shall I liken the people of 
this generation ? " So comprehensive a phrase as rods d^0p<$Trou$ 
rijs yeveas TcuJnjs may include the Baptist and the Christ : and 
to assume that it does include them frees the true interpretation 
of the parable from seeming to be somewhat at variance with tha 


opening words. With the double question comp. xiil 18; Mk 
iv. 30. 

32. There are two parties of children. This is more dearly 
marked by rots frcpois in Mt than by dXA^Xois here. Which of 
the two groups is blamed ? It has been taken both ways, (i) The 
children who invite the second group to play, first at dances and 
then at dirges, represent Jesus and the Baptist with their respective 
followers. The children who waywardly refuse to join in any kind 
of game are the Jews as represented by the hierarchy and the 
majority of the people. These rejected both the asceticism of 
John and the joyous freedom of the Gospel Godet infers from 
dAA^Aot? that the two groups of children change sides and take 
turns in proposing the form of play. But it is not necessary to 
give so much meaning to oAAiJAois. Yet such a change would 
not be difficult to interpret The Jews may have proposed to the 
Baptist to become less stem. They certainly tried to force fast- 
ing on Jesus. And hence (2) the possibility of the other inter- 
pretation, which is preferred by Euthymius, Stier, and Alford, and 
is ably defended by Trench (Studies in the Gospels^ pp. 150-153). 
The children sitting in the market-place and finding fault with 
their fellows are the Jews. John comes to them hi his severity, 
and they want him to play at festivals. When he retains his strict 
mode of life, they complain and say, "We piped to you, and you 
did not dance." Then Christ comes to them as the bringer of 
joy, and they want Him to play at funerals* When He retains 
His own methods, they say, "We wailed, and you did not weep." 
This interpretation has two advantages. It makes the men of 
this generation, viz. the Jews, to be like the children who cry, " We 
piped," etc. And it gives the two complaints a chronological 
order. "We piped," etc., is a complaint against the Baptist, who 
came first; "We wailed," eta, is a complaint against the Christ, 
who came afterwards. 

With KaOtifi&ots comp. v. 27; with dyop$, Mk. vi 56; with 
irpocr^wwjGoriv dXXifjXois, Acts xxiL 2 ; with tjflXiqcrafiey, i Cor. adv. 7 ; 
with ApxnoroffOe, 2 Sam. vL 21 ; with i0piji^<rapLi>, Jn. xvi. 20. Of 
these vpocr^o>vty is a favourite word : see on vi. 13. Both 0pi]wtK 
and icXcueiK refer to the outward manifestation of grief as distinct 
from the feeling ; and here the outward expression only is needed. 

88. juri) coda? apron JM^T* ntpw otw?. "Without eating bread 
or drinKng wine*; spoken from the point of view of these who 
objected to John. He did not take the ordinary food of mankind ; 
and so Mt says, "neither eating nor drinking." For toe poetic 
form c<r0o) see on x. 7. 

^ AatfJuSjaoF ?xu They afterwards said the same of Jesus (Jn. 
vii 20, viiL 48, x. 20} ; and Scu/tovcoy l^as shows that Sat^no? 
is ace. and not nom- Renan compares the Arabic Medjnoun cnti 


as showing that Orientals consider all madness to be possession by 
a demon (V. dej. p. 263). See on iy. 33. One regrets that the 
American Revisers did not carry their point in getting "demon* 1 
substituted for " devil " as the rendering of SCU/AOVIOV. Tyn. Cpv. 
and Cran. make great confusion by translating "hath the devil.* 
Wic, is better with " hath a fende." The Xeyerc in w* 33 and 34 
shows that some of those censured are present Comp, xi. 1 5, where 
Jesus is accused of casting out demons with the help of Beelzebub. 

34. 4>cxyos. Like ofror&n;*, this is a subst and therefore paroxytone: 
, which L. and S. give, would be an adj. See Chandler, Greek Ac* 
cmttuttion.) 21 5, Latin Versions vary between devorcttcr ( Vulg. ), vor&tor (q), 
vorax (c e), manducator (d). English Versions vary between " devourer M 
(Wic.), "glutton" {Tyn. Cov.), "gurmander" (Rhem.), and "gluttonous 
man" (Cran. AV. RV.). The ref. is to v. 33 and similar occasions. For 
$&<* reXwrtD* see v. 27, 29, 30. 

85. teat l5tKaic50ij 3\ oro<|>ta. "And yet wisdom was justified." 
In N.T. KM often introduces a contrast, which is placed side by 
ride with that with which it is contrasted : " and (instead of what 
might be expected), and yeL w This is specially common in Jn. 
(L s, 10, iii. n, 32, v, 39, 40, vi. 36, 43, 70, vii. 28, etc.). Atque 
sometimes has the same force; Cic. De Off. iii. 11. 48. Although 
the Jews as a nation rejected the methods both of John and of 
Christ, yet there were some who could believe that in both these 
methods the Divine wisdom was doing what was right 

e&iKatw07). This looks back to eSi/caiWav in ver. 29, and ^ 
oxK^i'a looks back to Tqv jSovAip rov cov in ver. 30. Here, as in 
Rom. iii. 4 (Ps, 1L 6), &KCWOCO means " Show or pronounce to be 
righteous, declare or admit to be just" The analogy of verbs in 
-o<i> is often wrongly urged. An important distinction is sometimes 
overlooked. In the case of external qualities, such verbs do mean 
to "make or render? whatever the noun from which they are de- 
rived signifies (cp^/wxo, TU^XO<D, xpwow, K.T.X.). But in the case 
of moral qualities this is scarcely possible, and it may be doubted 
whether there is a passage in which Sucawo) clearly means "I 
make righteous." Similarly, too> never means " I make worthy," 
but " I consider worthy, treat as worthy." In the case of words 
which might apply to either external or moral qualities both mean- 
ings are possible ace. to the context: thus 6/iotoo) may mean 
either "make like/* ^. make an image like a man (Eur. HeL 33, 
comp. Acts xiv, n; Rom. ix. 29), or "consider like, compare" 
(ver. 31, xiiL 18, 20). 

In &t*ou<609 we perhaps have an example of what is sometimes called tbt 
gnomic aorist Comp. Jn. rr. 6; Tas. L 11, 24; i Pet L 24. Burton, 
But see Win. xL b. I, p. 346, where the existence of this aorist In 

to* vtfrwr T&T T&ntr o*rijs. "At the hands of all her dlil* 


dren": the justification comes /ram them. It is certainly incorrect 
to interpret diro as implying rescuing or protecting "from the 
attacks of all her children," viz. from the Jews. The children of 
the Divine Wisdom are the faithful minority who have welcomed 
the Baptist and the Christ, not the unbelieving majority who re- 
jected them. In ML xi. 19 there is no iravTwv, and DLMX 
omit it here. But it is certainly genuine : see on vi. 30. In A P B 
irdvTwv is placed last with emphasis : there are no exceptions. 
But the order of K B is to be preferred. ML has cp-ycov for TCKVWV, 
and has e/oywv here. For the personification of the Wisdoti of 
God comp. Prov. viii., ix. ; Ecdus. xxiv. ; Wisd. vl 22-ix, 18. 

86-50. The Anointing by the Woman that was a Sinner. 
Without note of time or express connexion. The connexion 
apparently is that she is an illustration of ver. 35. The proposal 
to identify this anointing with that by Mary of Bethany just before 
the Passion (ML xxvL 6 ; Mk. xiv. 3 ; Jn. xii. 3) is ancient, for 
Origen on ML xxvi. 6 contends against it ; and it still has sup- 
porters. Thus Holtzmann is of opinion that the act of a "clean" 
person in the house of "an unclean " (Simon the leper) has been 
changed by Lk. into the act of an "unclean" person in the house 
of a "clean" (Simon the Pharisee), in order to exhibit the way in 
which Christ welcomed outcasts, a subject which Lk. often makes 
prominenL But the confusion of Mary of Bethany with a 
notorious d/ia/moAos by Lk., who knows the character of Mary 
(x. 39, 42), is scarcely credible. And there is nothing improbable 
in two such incidents. Indeed the first might easily suggest the 
second. Simon is one of the commonest of names (there are 
ten or eleven Simons in N.T. and about twenty in Josephus), and 
therefore the identity of name proves nothing. Moreover, there 
are differences of detail, which, if not conclusive, are against the 
identification. The chief objection is the irreconcilable difference 
between Mary of Bethany and the d/wtprwXos. Strauss and Baur 
suggest a confusion with the woman taken in adultery. But the 
narrative betrays no confusion : everything is dear and harmonious. 
The conduct both of Jesus and of the woman is unlike either 
fiction or dumsily distorted facL His gentle severity towards 
Simon and tender reception of the sinner, are as much beyond the 
reach of invention as the eloquence of her speechless affection. 

On the traditional, but baseless, identification of the woman 
with Mary of Magdala see on viiL 2. The identification of this 
woman with both Mary of Magdala and Mary of Bethany is ad- 
vocated by Hengstenberg. His elaborate argument is considered 
a tour de force, but it has not carried conviction with iL The 
fotest non eadem cssc of Ambrose is altogether an understate- 
menL It is probably from considerations of delicacy that Luke 
does not name her : or his source may have omitted to do so. 


The leading thought in the narrative is the contrast between 
Pharisees and sinners in their behaviour to Christ. 

86. *Hpc6ra 8^ TIS fluh-oV T&V ^apiomwy Iva (Jxtyrj JXCT' afrrou. There fa 
nothing to show that the Pharisee had any sinister motive in asking 
Him, although he was evidently not very friendly. As the Pharisees 
were generally hostile to Christ, it may have been a courageous 
thing. He is inclined to believe that Jesus may be a Prophet 
(ver. 39) ; and Jesus rebukes him as one who loved little, not as a 
secret enemy. But, like Herod Antipas, he may simply have been 
curious. li. records two other instances of Christ being the 
guest of a Pharisee (xi. 37, xiv. i). For Iva, see on iv. 3, and comp. 
vi 31, viL 6 ; and for KaTK\i6r) (x B D LXB) see on ix. 14. 

37. Kal ISou YUKTJ tjns rjv. The opening words imply that her 
presence created surprise. The ^ns is stronger than 17 and has 
point here : " who was of such a character as to be " : comp. viiL 3. 
This is the right order, and iv rg iroXci follows, not precedes, #ri$ 
yv ( B LB and most Versions). The exact meaning is not quite 
dear : either, "which was a sinner in the city," t\e. was known as 
such in the place itself; or possibly, " which was in the city, a 
sinner." The city is probably Capernaum. 

d|iopTwX<5s. A person of notoriously bad character, and prob- 
ably a prostitute : comp. Mt xxi. 32. For instances of this use 
of d/juzpra>Xos see Wetst To the Jews all Gentiles were in a special 
sense a/zaprcaXot (vi. 32, 33, xxiv. 7; Gal. ii. 15; i Mac. ii. 44); 
but something more than this is evidently meant here. The yv 
need not be pressed to mean, "She was even up to this time" 
(Alf.) ; nor does aecessit ad Dominum immunda^ ut redtret munda 
(Aug.) imply this. The fy expresses her public character : fy & rg 
iroXet. She had repented (perhaps quite recently, and in conse- 
quence of Christ's teaching); but the general opinion of her 
remained unchanged. Her venturing to enter a Pharisee's house 
in spite of this shows great courage. In the East at the present 
day the intrusion of uninvited persons is not uncommon (Trench, 
Parables, p. 302 n. ; Tristram, Eastern Customs in Bible Lands> 
p. 36). Mary of Bethany was not an intruder. Note the 
idiomatic pres. KaraiceiTcu : just equivalent to our " He is dining 
with me to-day," meaning that he will do so. 

dXrfpooTpop jiijpoo. Unguent-boxes or phials were called Xo- 
ftafrrpa even when not made of alabaster. But unguenta optime 
servantur in alabasfris (Plin. N. H. xiii 3, xxxvi. 12 ; comp, 
Hdt iii 20. i). See WetsL on Mt XXVL 6. 

The word is of all three genders in different writers $ bat in class. Grk. 
the sing, is dAda<rrpoj, either masc. or fern* The origin of fjtipov is unknown, 
fjivpw, fufippa.) (Tfi.tpra, fu&pras being conjectures. In N.T. certainly, and prob- 
ably in LXX also, /tfyxy, " ointment," is distinguished from IXtuox, " oiL" 
Trench, Syn, xxxviii. 


88. oracra ^irio-ai irapd TO&S ir58a$ aurou. The sandals were 
removed at meals, and people reclined with their feet behind 
them ; she could therefore easily approach the feet Whi 1 ! 7 
writes irapa TOVS irdSas (vill. 35, 41, x. 39, xvii. 16; Acts Iv. 35, 
37, v. 2, 10, vii. 58, xxiL 3), Mk. has ?rpos rous 7ro3as (v. 22, vii. 25), 
and Jn. eig rous TroSas (xi. 32). Mt has trapa. rota zrodas (xv. 30). 

roTs Bdcpu<ri,i/ iJpfaTo fjpx* i y TOUS iroSas afrrou Kal rats 0piji>, 
K.T.X. This was no part of her original plan. She came to anoint 
His feet, and was overcome by her feelings; hence the fata.. 
The ppfyciy led to the ^^acrcrei/, which was also unpremeditated. 
Among the Jews it was a shameful thing for a woman to let down 
her hair in public; but she makes this sacrifice. For ppe'xeiv 
comp. Ps. vi. 7 : it is probably a vernacular word (Kennedy, 
Sources ofN.T. Grk, p. 39). 

Kal KaT6<|)iXt. Note the compound verb and the change of 
tense : " She continued to kiss affectionately." The word is used 
of the kiss of the traitor (Mt. xxvi. 49 ; Mk. xiv. 45), which was 
demonstrative, of the prodigal's father (Lk. xv. 20), and of the 
Ephesian elders in their last farewell (Acts xx. 37), and nowhere 
else in N.T. Comp. Xen. Mem. iL 6. 33. Kissing the feet was a 
common mark of deep reverence, especially to leading Rabbis 
(Xen. Cyr. vii 5. 32 ; Polyb. xv. i. 7 ; Aristoph. Vesp. 608). 

89. irpo^Tijs. Referring to the popular estimate of Jesus 
(yv. 1 6, 17). The OUTOS is contemptuous. No true Prophet would 
knowingly allow himself to be rendered unclean by contact with 
such a person. The reading 6 ^0^17^75 (B H) would mean " the 
great Prophet" of Deut xviiL 15 (comp. Jn. L 25, vii. 40), or 
possibly "the Prophet that He professes to be." The art is 
accepted by Weiss, bracketed by WH,, put in the margin by Treg., 
and rejected by Tisch. 

TIS Kal iroTairf) t| yvv}] YJTIS fiimrcu aurou. " Who and of what 
character is the woman who is clinging to Him." She was notori- 
ous both in person and in life. See on L 29. The farrcrcu implies 
more than mere touching, and is the pres. of continued action. 
Trench, Syn. xviL; Lft on Col. ii. 21. Imo si fu 9 Simon^ sdres, 
quails h&c jam esset femina^ aliter judicares (Beng.). The Srt 
comes after eytvaxrKv : " that she is," not " because she is." See on 
ver. 16, and comp. Is. Ixv. 5. 

4O. diroicpi0is 5 *Jtjcrou$. Audimt Phartsseum eogifanfem (Aug. 
Serm. xcix.). Jesus not only answered but confuted his doubts. 
Simon questioned the mission of Jesus because He seemed to be 
unable to read the woman's character. Jesus shows Simon that 
He can read his inmost thoughts : He knows TIS Kal TTOTCMTOS oru 
For lx<o om TI iTretK see on xiL 4. Christ asks permission of His 
host to speak. As Godet remarks, there is a tope of Socratic irony 
in the address. The historic present (<f>y<rw) is very rare in Lk. 


41. Avo xp><J>iX^Tai tjo-av Savior^ TIV. For the orthography of the two 
substantives see \VH. ii. App. p. 154; Greg. Proleg. p. 89. In N.T. 
Xpeo<l>t\tnjs occurs only here and xvi. 5 ; in LXX Job xxxi. 37 ; Prov. aodx. 13. 
The word is of late origin. All English Versions, except Rhem. and AV., 
rightly have "lender" and not "creditor" for forior^s: Vulg. fcsncraior^ 
Luth. Wucherer. In weight of silver the denarius was considerably less than 
a shilling ; in purchasing power it was about two shillings, the wage of a day- 
labourer (Mt xx, 2) and of a Roman soldier (Tac. Ann. L 17. 8, where see 
Fumeaux). The two debts were about ^50 and $ 

42. pi) IX<$TWK aflroiK dwoSouKau " Because they had not where- 
with to pay*'; non habtntibus illis unde redderent (Vulg.). Comp. 
xii. 4, xiv. 14 ; Acts iv. 14. Others render 1-^.iv in these passages 
"to be able," like habeo quodvnth the subjunctive. In exapiVaro, 
"he made them a present" of what they owed, we trace the Pauline 
doctrine of free grace and salvation for all. Comp. ver. 21. 

TLS ouv afirwK TrXctoK dyainqcrci; This is the point of the parable, 
and perhaps the only point The love and gratitude of those who 
have had debts remitted to them depends upon their estimate of 
the amount which has been remitted to them rather than upon the 
actual amount. 

43. YrroXajApd^w. " I suppose," " I presume," with an air of 
supercilious indifference. Comp. Acts ii. 15 ; Job xxv. 3 ; Tobit 
vi. 1 8 ; Wisd. xvii. 2. It is very improbable that viroXa^avto here 
means " I reply," as in x. 30 ; Job ii. 4, iv. i, vi. i, ix. i, xxv. i. 
In N.T. it is almost peculiar to Lk. The 'Op6ws iKpi^as may be 
compared with the vow 6p&&$ of Socrates, when he has led the 
disputant into an admission which is fatal. In N.T. op0o)s occurs 
only here, x. 28, xx 21 ; Mk. vii 35. Freq. in LXX. Comp. OVK 
&pivaT opflois (Wisd. vi. 4). 

44. orpa<|>is irpos T^ yvvaltcL She was behind Him. His 
turning to her while He spoke to Simon was in itself half a rebuke. 
Up to this He seems to have treated her as He treated the 
Syrophenician woman, as if paying no attention. The series of 
contrasts produces a parallelism akin to Hebrew poetry, and in 
translating a rhythm comes almost spontaneously. 

BXeircts Tau-nrjy TTJK yuycuica ; This is probably a question : Simon 
had ignored her presence. The erou being placed before els iV 
oiKLaK gives point to the rebuke, but it hardly makes the <rov en> 

eitic. An enclitic cannot be emphatic, and o-ov here is enclitic, 
e meaning is not " I entered into thine house," in preference 
to others; but rather, "I came to thee in thy house," and not 
merely in the public street; " I was thy invited guest." 

u8wp fjtoi em iro'Sas. Comp. Gen. xviii. 4; Judg. xix. 21; i Sam. 
xxv 41 ; Jn. xiii. 5 ; i Tim. v. 10. The reading is somewhat un- 
certain, and there are many variations between poi and /x,ov, WO&M 
and rov? woSas, and also of order : /*ov cirl rovs TroSa? ( LS) may 
be right 


45. <j>i\T|p,a. Comp. Gen. xxxiii. 4; Exod. xviiL 7; 2 Sam. 
xv. 5, xix. 39, xx. 9. The traitor's choosing it as a sign seems to 
mark it as usual. 

d<{>' fc itnjX0ov. The reading' (L 1 Vulg.) is an attempt 
to avoid the apparent exaggeration in " since the time I came in." 
But there need be no exaggeration, or difference of meaning, be- 
tween the two readings. The woman very likely entered with 
Christ and His disciples in order to escape expulsion. Fear of it 
would make her begin to execute her errand directly the guests 
were placed. The compound KaTa<j>iXou(ro makes the contrast \vith 
<t'A.?7/wx more marked, and rovs TroSas makes it still more so. The 
<f>D(.rifjLa would have been on the cheek, or possibly (if Simon had 
wished to be very respectful) on the hand. 

46. Xaiw. Very cheap in Palestine, where olives abound, and 
very commonly used (Ps. xxiii. 5, cxli. 5 ; Mt. vt 17). The /tvpw 
would be more valuable, and possibly very costly (Jn. xii. 3, 5). 
This woman, whom Simon so despised in his heart, had really 
done the honours of the house to his guest This fact would be 
all the more prominent if she entered close after Jesus, and thus 
at once supplied Simon's lack of courtesy. 

47. This is a verse which has been the subject of much contro- 
versy. What is the meaning of the first half of it? We have to 
choose between two possible interpretations, i. "For which 
reason, I say to thee, her many sins have been forgiven, because 
she loved much " ; Le. oS x<p^ anticipates on, and X^yw croi is paren- 
thetical. Her sins have been forgiven for the reason that her love 
was great ; or her love won forgiveness. This is the interpretation 
of Roman Catholic commentators (see Schanz), and the doctrine } 
of contritio caritate formata is built upon it But it is quite at 
variance (a) with the parable which precedes ; (f) with the second 
half of the verse, which ought in that case to run, "but he who 
loveth little, wins little forgiveness " ; (c) with ver. 50, which states 
that it wasfait/i, not love, which had been the means of salvation ; 
a doctrine which runs through the whole of the N.T. This cannot 
be correct. 2. " For which reason I say to thee, her many sins 
have been forgiven (and I say this to thee), because she loved 
much " ; /.* Xeyo> <roi is not parenthetical, but is the main sentence. 
This statement, that her many sins have been forgiven, is rightly 
made to Simon, because he knew of her great sinfuiness, 'he had 
witnessed her loving reverence, and he had admitted the principle 
that the forgiveness of much produces much love. This interpreta- 
tion is quite in harmony with the parable, with the second half of 
the verse, and with ver. 50. There were two things evident, the 
past sin and the present love, both of them great A third might 
be known, because (according to the principle just admitted) it 
explained how great love could follow great sin, the forgiveness 


of the sin. Remissio peccatorum, Stmoni non cogitata^ probata a 
frucfu, qui cst widens^ qmtm ilia sit occulta (Beng). 

at dfiapTiai auTTJs ai iroXXau The second art refers to v. 39: 
" The many sins of which thou thinkest" " Her sins, yes (accord- 
ing to thy estimate), her many sins." 

w Se dXfyoy d4>tT<xi. " But he to whom little is forgiven," i.e. who 
thinks that he has committed little which could need forgiveness. 
It is said with evident reference to Simon. Pharis&e> parum 
dihgh) quia parum tibi dimitti suspicaris ; non quia parum dimit- 
titur^ sed quia parum putas quod dimittitur (Aug. Serm* xcix,). For 
this use of the dat comp. Soph. Ant, 904. 

48. ctireK Se afarfj. What He had to say to Simon (ver. 40) is 
finished : it is His true entertainer (44-46) who now occupies His 

d<j>Wrai. "Have been and remain forgiven": see on v. 20. 
There is nothing either in the word or in the context to show that 
her sins were not forgiven until this moment : the context implies 
the opposite, and this is confirmed by the use of the perf. Augus- 
tine's accessit ad Dominum tmmunda, ut redtret munda is in this 
respect misleading. The teaching of Christ had brought her to 
repentance and to assurance of forgiveness, and this assurance had 
inspired her with love and gratitude. Jesus now confirms her 
assurance and publicly declares her forgiveness. He thus lends 
His authority to rehabilitate her with society. 

49. Xeyeiy kv laurots. "To say within themselves " rather than 
among themselves ; so that Jesus answered their thoughts, as He 
had already answered Simon's. The OUTOS is slightly contemptu- 
ous, as often (v. 21 ; Mt xiiL 55 ; Jn. vi. 42, 52, etc.). The KOI 
in 8s Kal djiaprtas d^iTjcrtK is "even" rather than "also." It is 
difficult to see the point of "also." 

50. iirv Se irp&s -ri]v yuvauca. "But He said unto the woman." 
He ignored their objection, and yet indirectly answered it, by telling 
her that it was her faith that had delivered her from her sins. 

iropeu'ou e$ cip^n^. "Depart into peace," i.e. into a lasting 
condition of peace : a Hebrew formula of blessing and of good- 
will, with special fulness of meaning. Comp. viii. 48 ; ML v. 34 ; 
i Sam. i. 17, xx. 42. In Acts xvi. 36 and Jas. ii. 16 we have cv 
e OT"27> which is less strong, the peace being joined to the moment 
of departure rather than to the subsequent life: comp. Judg. 
xviii. 6. In Acts xv. 33 we have /ier s 

Among the various points which distinguish this anointing from that by Mary 
of Bethany should be noted that here we have no grumbling at the waste of the 
ointment and no prediction of Christ's death, while there no absolution is pro- 
nounced and Mary is not addressed. See Hase, Gesch. J. 91, p. 651, ecu 
1891 ; also Schanz, p. 250, at the end of this section. 

VIII. 1-3. The ministering Women. This section is 


evidence of the excellence of LL's sources. The information 
contained in it is exact and minute. The names and other details 
are utterly unlike fiction. An inventor would avoid such things 
as likely to be refuted : moreover, no motive for invention can be 
discerned The passage tells us- what no other Evangelist 
makes known how Jesus and His disciples lived when they 
were not being entertained by hospitable persons. The common 
purse (Jn. xiiL 29; comp. xii. 6) was kept supplied by the 
generosity of pious women. This form of piety was not rare. 
Women sometimes contributed largely towards the support of 
Rabbis, whose rapacity in accepting what could ill be spared was 
rebuked by Christ (xx. 47 ; Mt xxiii. 13 ; ML xii 40) with great 

L Kal ylpTo I? T$ leaflets Kal a&r&s SuuSeuey. See detached 
note p. 45, and comp. v. i, 12, 14: for fr rQ leaflets see small 
print on vii. 1 1. The avros anticipates /cat ot ScoSeKa, " He Himself 
and the Twelve." But the KM before avros comes after eyo/ero 
and must not be coupled with the *a* before ol &8e/ca. In N.T. 
SioSeJu occurs only here and Acts xvii. i, but it is freq. in LXX 
(Gen. xii. 6, xiii. 17, etc.); also in Polyb. Plut. etc. Comp. fac. 6^ 
xiii. 22. 

icard, inSXiK icl Kara Kcfywjr. Ne quis fud&us pr&tcritum $e queri 
posset (Grotius), Jesus preached city by city (Acts xv. 21) and 
village by village. The clause is amphibolous. It probably is 
meant to go with SwoScve, but may be taken with /aypucrow Kal 
cvayy. The incidental way in which the severity of Christ's 
labours is mentioned is remarkable. Comp. ix. 58, xiii. 22 ; Mt 
ix. 35; ML vi. 31. For e&aYyeXi6fi>s see on ii. 10. We are 
not to understand that the Twelve preached in His presence, if at 
all. Note the <rvv (not ^era), and see on w. 38, 51, and L 56. 

2. ir^ufAaTWK ironjptov. See on iv. 33. We cannot teU how 
many of these women had been freed from demons : perhaps only 
Mary Magdalen, the others having been cured oaro ao-0eva)v. For 
the diro comp. v. 15, vii. 21. 

^ KaXoufi&Tj MaySaXiiri]. See on vL 15, The adj. probably 
means " of Magdala," a town which is not named in N.T. ; for the 
true reading in Mt xv. 39 is " Magadan. 7 ' "Magdala is only the 
Greek form of Migdol, or watch-tower, one of the many places of 
the name in Palestine" (Tristram, Bibk Places, p. 260); and it is 
probably represented by the squalid group of hovels which now 
bear the name of Mejdel^ near the centre of the western shore of 
Jie lake. Magdala was probably near to Magadan, and being 
much better known through 17 M aySoAiTn;, at last it drove the 
ktter name out of the common text See Stanley, Sin. <5r* Pal. 
p. 382. Mary being a common name, the addition of something 
distinctive was convenient; and possibly a distinction from Mary 


of Bethany was specially designed by the Evangelists. Mary 
Magdalen is commonly placed first when she is mentioned with 
other women (ML xxviL 56, 61, xxviii i ; Mk. xv. 40, 47, xvi. i ; 
Lk. xxiv. 10). Jn. xix. 25 is an exception. See on i. 36. 

dc{> 9 $s 8atp,<W &rrk ^\TjXu'0u This fact is mentioned in the 

disputed verses at the end of ML (xvi. 9). It indicates a pos- 
session of extraordinary malignity (Mk. v. 9), We need not give 
any mystical interpretation to the number seven: comp. xi, 26; 
ML xii. 25. There is nothing to show that demoniacs generally, 
or Mary in particular, had lived specially vicious lives : and the 
fact that no name is given to the a/taprcoAos in the preceding 
section, while Mary Magdalen is introduced here as an entirely 
new person, is against the traditional identification of the two, 
Moreover, such an affliction as virulent demoniacal possession 
would be almost incompatible with the miserable trade of prosti- 
tution. If LL had wished to intimate that the dju-aprcoXos is Mary 
Magdalen, he could have done it much more clearly. Had he 
wished to conceal the fact, he would not have placed these two 
sections in juxtaposition. Had he wished to withhold the name 
of the dju-apTwAog, who may possibly be included among the h-cpai 
TroAAcu, he would have done as he has done. The a/iapro>Aos and 
Mary Magdalen and Mary of Bethany are three distinct persons. 

8. "ludi'a. She is mentioned with Mary Magdalen again 
xxiv. 10 : all that we know about her is contained in these two 
passages. Godet conjectures that Chuza is the /faonXucos, who 
" believed and his whole house" (Jn. iv. 46-53). In that case her 
husband would be likely to let her go and minister to ChrisL The 
Herod meant is probably Antipas, and his cmrpoTros would be the 
manager of his household and estates : comp. ML xx. 8. Blunt 
finds here a coincidence with ML xiv. 2; Herod "said to his 
servants^ This is John the BaptisL" If Herod's steward's wife was 
Christ's disciple, He would often be spoken of among the servants 
at the court; and Herod addresses them, because they were 
familiar with the subjecL Comp. the case of Manaen (Acts xiiL i), 
Herod's owrpo<o$- (Undesigned Coincidences, PL IV. xi. p. 263, 
8th ed). Of Susanna nothing else is known, nor of the other 
women, unless Mary, the mother of James and Joses, and Salome 
(Mk. xv. 40) may be assumed to be among them. 

alriKes SITJKOKOUX aurois. "Who were of such a character as to 
minister to them " ; & they were persons of substance. For 
see on viL 37, and for StaKowp comp. Rom. xv. 25. The a 
means Jesus and the Twelve, the reading avro> (A L M X) being 
probably a correction from Mt. xxviL 55 ; Mk. xv. 41. But djrols 
has special poinL It was precisely because Jesus now had twelve 
disciples who always accomoanied Him, that there was need of 
**.u<*u support from other disopw^ 


K TWV fiirapx<$Hw afaais. It is this which distinguishes this 
passage from Mt xxviL 55 and Mk. xv. 41. There the Sw/comv 
might refer to mere attendance en Him. We learn from this that 
neither Jesus nor the Twelve wrought miracles for their own 

Here, as in aoL IJ and Acts iv. 32, r& fardpzorm has the dat Every- 
where else in Lk. (au. 21, rii. 33, 44, xiv. 33, rvi. I, xk. 8) and elsewhere 
in N.T. (five times) it has the gen. So also in LXX the gen. is the rule, the 
dat. the exception, if it is the true reading anywhere. Both ra vTdpxorra 
and {fTdpx^ty are favourite expressions with Lk, See on ver. 41* 

4-ia The Parable of the Sower. Mt riii. 1-23; ML 
iv. 1-20. We have already had several instances of teaching by 
means of parables (v. 36-39, vi. 39, 4*-44 47~49 ^ 4* 42) ; 
but they are brief and incidental Parables seem now to become 
more common in Christ's teaching, and also more elaborate. 
This is intelligible, when we remember the characteristics of 
parables. They have the double property of revealing and con- 
cealing. They open the truth, and impress it upon the minds of 
those who are ready to receive it : but they do not instruct, though 
they may impress, the careless (ver. 10). As Bacon says of a 
parable^ "it tends to vail, and it tends to illustrate a truth. 7 * As the 
hostility to His teaching increased, Jesus would be likely to make 
more use of parables, which would benefit disciples without giving 
opportunity to His enemies. The parable of the Sower is in some 
respects chief among the parables, as Christ Himself seems to 
indicate (Mk. iv. 13). It is one of the two which all three record, 
the other being the Wicked Husbandmen : and it is one of which 
we have Chrisfs own interpretation. 

4, ufi6Wos Sc oxXou iroXXou KOI TWV Kara iroXtK e-imropeuofJLeVttH ir. 
afir. The constr. is uncertain, and we have choice of two ways, 
according as the KCH is regarded as simply co-ordinating, or as 
epexegetic. i. "And when a great multitude was coming 
together, and they of every city were resorting to Him." 2. 
"And when a great multitude was coming together, namely ', of 
those who city by city were resorting to Him." According to 2, 
the multitude consisted wholly of those who were following from 
different towns (ver. i). As no town is named, there was perhaps 
no crowd from the place itself. In any case the imperf. part 
should be preserved in translation. It was the growing multitude 
which caused Him to enter into a boat (ML xiii. 2 ; ML iv. i). 
See on XL 29. Except Tit. i. 5, Kara voXiv is peculiar to Lk. 

The Latin Versions vary greatly: cotmeniente autem turba magna et 
torum qut ex cimtaiibus adumubant dtxit pardbplam (a) ; eonvmiente. avtem 
turba multa et qui de ringulis cioitatibus exibant dtxit /. (c) congregate 
populo multo ft ad civitatem iUr facisbanf ad cum dixit parabola** 
ad CM (c.i ? *** ?&** tvrba pluritna totrucnittt et de civiiattbus r&> 


perarent ad eum dixit per similitudtmm (Vulg.); cum autem turba plurima 
convemsset (<rw&0oro5, D) it dt wvitatibits advcmrcnt multi dixit per 
simifaudimm (Cod. Brix.)* 

Sid, irapapoXfjs. The expression occurs nowhere else. 
Mt and Mk. write ev 7rapa/3oA<us Xeyctv or XaAeti/, while LL has 
Trapa^oAiTv direw or A.eyeti'. See on iv. 23, v. 36, and vi. 39 ; and 
on the parable itself see Gould on Mk. iv. i if. 

5. fijX0K 6 orretpwy, So in all three accounts : " The sower 
went forth." The force of the article is "he whose business it is 
to sow": he is the representative of a class who habitually have 
these experiences. Rhem. has "the sower" in all three places, 
Cran. in Mt. and Mk., Cov. in Mt. For the pres. part, with the 
article used as a substantive comp. iii. n, v. 31, vi. 29, 30, ix. 2, 
11, x. 1 6, etc. There is solemnity in the repetition, 6 cnreLpw TOV 
tnmpcu rov orropov. The comparison of teaching with sowing is 
frequent in all literature ; but it is possible that Jesus here applies 
what was going on before their eyes. See the vivid description of 
a startling coincidence with the parable in Stanley, Sin. & Pal. 
p. 425. 

iv TW (nreipciK a&roV. " During his sowing, while he sowed " : 
CLVTOV is subj., not obj., and refers to 6 o-Trapwi', not rov trrropov. 
See on iii. 21. Note the graphic change of prepositions: irapa 

TVJV 5BOV (Ver. 5), 7rl TTjV ITCTpaV (VCH 6), V /4<Ttt) (VCH 7), 15 TYJV 

yvjv (ver. 8). In this verse Lk. has three features which are 
wanting in Mt and Mk. : rov cnropov, /cat KaTerra-n^, and TOW 


trap* TV && Not along the way," but " by the side of the 
way." It fell on the field, but so dose to the road that it was 
trampled on. 

Both Lk* and Mk. here have fuh followed by Kai : fl ffo . . wtl *rpor, 
Comp. Mk. ix. 12, The absence of & after tfw is freq. In Acts, Pauline 
Epp., and Heb. 

6. lirl T^V Ttlrpav. The rock had a slight covering of soil ; and 
hence is called TO ircrptoSes (Mk.) and ra irerpwfy (Mt), which does 
not mean "stony ground," i.e. full of stones, but "rocky ground," 
i.e. with rock appearing at intervals and with "no depth of earth." 
The thinness of the soil would cause rapid germination and rapid 
withering ; but Lk omits the rapid growth. With $u^ comp. Prov. 
xxvi. 9 ; Exod. x. 5 ; and (for the constr.) Lk. ii. 4. For iKjm<8a, 
"moisture," Mt. and Mk. have ptfav. The word occurs Jen 
xviL 8 ; Job xxvL 14 ; Jos. Ant. iiL i. 3 ; but nowhere else in N T. 

7. Iv fU<rw TWP dKa^OwK. The result of the falling was that it 
was in the midst of the thorns: prep, of rest after a verb of 
motion : comp. vii. 16. Lk. is fond of iv /i<r<p (ii. 46, x. 3, xxl 


21, xxii. 27, 5, xxiv. 36; Acts i. 15, etc.). Elsewhere it Is rare, 
except in Rev. Neither Mt nor Mk. have it here. 

<rui/<}>uurau Here only in N.T. In LXX only Wisd xiii. 13. 
In Plato and Aristotle it is transitive: "cause to grow together." 
We are to understand that the good seed fell into ground where 
young thorns were growing ; otherwise the growing together would 
hardly be possible. Indeed the fotfifjcrav al aKavOai of Mt and 
Mk. almost implies that the thorns were not yet visible, when the 
good seed was sown in the midst of them. The d-ir&mf civ means 
"choked it off? so as to exterminate it: comp. the dxd in cwro- 
Krai/a). Wic. has " stranghden it " ; but that, though sufficient for 
suffocaverunt (Vulg.), does not express the cwro. The verb occurs 
only here and ver. 31 in N.T., and in LXX only in Nah. ii. 12 and 
Tobit iii. 8. 

8. is nji'yfjj' T$JV dYo<%. Not merely upon, but into the soil 
The double article in all three accounts presents the soil and its 
goodness as two separate ideas : " the ground (that was intended 
for it), the good (ground)." Mt and Mk. have KaXfy. This 
repetition of the article is specially frequent in Jn. Lk. omits the 
sixty- and thirtyfold. Isaac is said to have reaped a hundredfold 
(Gen. xxvi. 12). Hdt (L 193. 4) states that in the plain of 
Babylon returns of two hundred- and even three hundredfold, 
were obtained. Strabo (xvi p. 1054) says much the same, but is 
perhaps only following Hdt See Wetst on Mt xiii. 8 for abundant 
evidence of very large returns. 

6 eytav &ra dKotfeii> ditoulrto. This formula occurs in all three. 
Comp. xiv. 35; Mt xL 15, xiiL 43. In Rev. we have the sing., 
6 I^cov o?s oKovcrdrw (ii. 7, u, 17, 29, iii. 6, 13, 22). The intro- 
ductory *<6m, " He cried aloud," indicates a raising of the voice^ 
and gives a solemnity to this concluding charge. The imperil 
perhaps means that the charge was repeated. Comp. Ezek. iiL 27 ; 
Horn. //. xv. 129. 

9. TIS aunj fy tj irapa|3oXiq. " What this parable might be in 
meaning." See small print on i. 29. Mt says that the disciples 
asked why He spoke to the multitude in parables. Christ answers 
both questions. For Itnip&Tw see on iii. 10. 

10. TOIS 8e Xowrois. "Those who are outside the circle of 
Christ's disciples " ; KtVot? rots If G>, as Mk. has it This implies 
that it is disciples generally, and not the Twelve only, who are 
being addressed. Mt is here the fullest of the three, giving the 
passage from Is. vL 9, 10 in fulL Lk. is very brief. 

Ivo, j3XrroiT6s pj pX&rooriK. At first sight it might seem as if 
the Iva. of Lk. and Mk. was very different from the on of Mt 
But the principle that he who hath shall receive more, while he 
who hath not shall be deprived of what he seemeth to have^ 
explains both the Iva. and the ore Jesus speaks in parables, 


w the multitude see without seeing and hear without hearing 
Bat He also speaks in parables in order that they may see without 
se'.:n.r and hear without hearing. They "have not" a mind to 
welcome instruction, and therefore they are taught in a way which 
deprives them of instruction, although it is full of meaning to those 
who desire to understand and do understand. But what the 
unsympathetic " hear without understanding " they remember, be- 
cause of its impressi\'e form ; and whenever their minds become 
fitted for it, its meaning will become manifest to them. 

WH. wnte 0-wfowu', from the unused trw(w, while other editors prefer 
rwiCffiy, from *wr%u or the unused ffwtfw. Similarly WH. have ffwlovw 
(Mt. xiii. 13), where others give awtoftrtp. II. App. p. 167. Here some 
authorities have ffw&fuf, as in LXX. 

1L Having answered the question Start eV 7rapa/?oXais Xeyets , 
Jesus now answers TIS eo-nv avrrj y irapaftoXiq ; To the disciples 
"who have " the one thing needful "more is given." The similarity 
between the seed and the word lies specially in the vital power 
which it secretly contains. Comp. "Behold I sow My law in 
you, and it shall bring fruit in you, and ye shall be glorified in it 
for even But our fathers, which received the law, kept it not, and 
observed not the statutes : and the fruit of the law did not perish, 
neither could it, for it was Thine ; yet they that received it perished, 
because they kept not the thing that was sown in them " (2 Esdr. 

ix. 3I-33)- 

6 Xoyos TOU 9ou. Mt. never (?xv. 6) has this phrase ; it occurs 
only once in Mk. (vii. 13) and once in Jn, (x. 35). Lk. has it 
four times in the Gospel (v. i, viii. n, 21, xi. 28) and twelve 
times in the Acts. Here Mk. has TOV Xoyov (iv. 15) and Mt. has 
nothing (xiii 18). So in ver. 21, where Lk. has rov X. TOV , 
Mk. has TO Q&T)pa rov . (ill 35) and Mt. TO Q&riiux. TOV waTpos 
(xiL 50). Does it mean "the word which comes from God" or 
" the word which tells of God " ? Probably the former. Comp, 
the O.T. formula "The word of the Lord came to." The gen. is 
subjective. Lft Epp. ofS. Paul, p. 15. 

12. ot Sc irapa rty 6Sov. There is no need to understand 
mrapem?, as is dear from Mk. iv. 15. "Those by the wayside" 
is just as intelligible as " Those who received seed by the way- 

ctra ?px<rai 6 Si<j3oXo$. Much more vivid than "And the 
birds are the deviL" This is Christ's own interpretation of the 
birds, and it is strong evidence for the existence of a personal 
deviL Why did not Jesus explain the birds as meaning impersonal 
temptations. He seems pointedly to insist upon a personal ad- 
rersary. See on x. 18. Mt. has 6 irovypfa, Mk. 6 o-aTctvas. The 
concluding words are peculiar to Lk. : "in order that they may 
not by believing be saved." Perhaps a sign of Pauline influence. 


13. The constr. is ambiguous. In vv. 12, 14, 15 dsrb is expres%d, and 
it is usually understood here : ** And those on the rock are they which, when 
they have heard, receive the word with joy ; and these have no root." But it 
is not necessary to msert the e/<rtX We may continue the protasis to rbr 
\6yov and make icat mean also : " And those on the rock, which, \vhen they 
have heard, receive the word with joy, these also (as well as those by the 
wayside) have no root." Thus ofrrot Covert? exactly corresponds to o5ro( 
clffw in w. 14, 15. But the usual arrangement is better. The ot arp^s Kaipbr 
vtffTcfowrtt' is a further explanation of o&rot. Neither Mt. nor Mk. has 
S^xorrat, of which Lk. is fond (u. 28, ix. 5, 48, 53, x. 8, 10, acvi. 4, 6, 7, 
9, etc.). It implies the internal acceptance; whereas \ajApdvci9 implies no 
more than the external reception. 

icaipw ircipao-fxou d<j>wrranrai. Mt and ML have 
>v, which shows that the temptation of persecution and ex- 
ternal suffering is specially meant : comp. Jas. i. 2. In all times 
of moral and spiritual revival persons who are won easily at first^ 
but apostatize under pressure, are likely to form a large portion : 
comp. Heb. iii. 12. The verb does not occur in Mt Mk. or Jn, 
The repetition of /cewpos is impressive. As opportunity commonly 
lasts only for a short time, /coipo's may mean "a short time." 

14. T& $1 els ro.5 &icav6a$ irlcrov. It is not probable that this is an ace. 
abs. : " Now as regards that which fell among the thorns." The attraction 
of oSroi (for TOVTO) to ol dKofoarrtt is quite intelligible. 

uK Kol TrXouTou lea! ffiw&v TOU ftfou. It is usual to take 
this after wfiTrvtyovrai, ; and this is probably correct : yet Weiss 
would follow Luther and others and join it with iropewftcvo*, "going 
on their way under the influence of cares," etc. But ver. 7 is 
against this : the cares, etc., are the thorns, and it is the thorns 
which choke. This does not reduce Tropevo/icvoi to a gehaltloser 
Zusatz. The choking is not a sudden process, like the trampling 
and devouring ; nor a rapid process, like the withering : it takes 
time. It is as they go on their way through life, and before they 
have reached the goal, that the choking of the good growth takes 
place. Therefore they never do reach the goal. The transfer of 
what is true of the growing seed to those in whose heart it is sown 
is not difficult; and <ru^irvryovrcu is clearly passive, not middle 
and transitive. The thorns choke the seed (ver. 7) ; these hearers 
are choked by the cares, etc. (ver. 14), Here only in N.T. does 
T\(r4>op6iK occur. It is used of animals as well as of plants 
(4 Mac. xiiL 20 ; Ps. Ixiv. 10, Sym,). 

16. T$ 8^ lv rp Ka\fi yr}, K.T.X. It fell into the good ground 
(ver. 8), and it is in the right ground. Perhaps otrwes has its full 
meaning: "who are of such a character as to," etc. The two 
epithets used of the ground, dyo&J in ver. 8 and /coXiJ in ver. 15, 
are combined for icapotp : "in a right and good heart" We must 
taks lv icapSi? with Karlxpvtn rather than with afcowrai/rcs. Even 
if dxcnW be interpreted to mean "hearing gladly, welcoming," it 


is not the ame as /car/x^v, which means "holdfast" (i Cor. 
xi. 2). It is reasonable to suppose that d/covv means the same in 
all four Cac-'j> (IS, 13, 14, 15). But KOLTCXOWTW (LL), TrapaSe'xoi/Tai 
(Mk. iv. 20), and trwuitv (Mt xiri. 23) may all be equivalents of 
the same Aramaic verb, meaning " to take in n : see footnote on 
v. 21. Comp, i Cor. xv. 2; i Thes. v. 21. 

Iv $Trop>vj. "With endurance, perseverance," rather than 
"patience," which would be /icucpoflv/iia : in patientia (Vulg.), in 
tolerantia (c), in suffertntia (d), per patientiam (bffFJ. See Lft 
on CoL L 1 1 ; Trench, Syn< liiL This wro/tony is the opposite of 
d^wrravrai (ver. 13), and is not in Mt or ML Thus Lk. gives the 
opposite of all three of the bad classes : Karixowriv, non ut in via ; 
KapTr?*l>opoicrWj non ut in $pinis\ iv VTTO/AOV^, non ut in petroso 
(Beng.). Neither here nor in ver. 8 does Lk. give the degrees of 
fruitfulness. ML and Mk. do so both in the parable and in the 
interpretation. The suggestion that Lk. has mistaken three 
numerals for a word which he translates v VVOJJL^ seems to be a 
little too ingenious (Expositor^ Nov. 1891, p. 381). That Jesus 
knew that ail four of the classes noticed in the parable were to be 
found in the audience before Him, is probable enough ; but we 
have no means of knowing it We may safely identify the Eleven 
and the ministering women with the fourth class. Judas is an 
instance of the third. But all are warned that the mere receiving 
of the word is not decisive. Everything depends upon how it is 
received and how it is retained. Grotius quotes from the Magna 
Aforalia : w ra ayafia vdvra ovra aya#a eortv, KOL VTTO TOVTW fir) 


olar word xAovrov KCU dtpx? 9 > ^ roiovros jcaAos 

16-18* Practical Inference. The connexion with what pre- 
cedes need not be doubted By answering the question of the 
disciples (ver. 9) and explaining the parable to them, Jesus had 
kindled a light within them. They must not hide it, but must see 
that it spreads to others. Here we have the opposite of what was 
noticed in the Sermon on the Mount Here Lk. has, gathered 
into one, sayings which Mt has, scattered in three different places 
(v. 15, x 26, xiiL 12 : comp. xiii. 12, xxv. 29). Mk. and Lk. are 
here very similar and consecutive. Comp. XL 33-36. 

16, \JXWK arf/as KaXumret aurdy <riccuei. " Having lighted a 
lamp," rather than "a candle." Trench, Syn. xlvi. ; Becker, 
CharickSt iii. 86, Eng. tr. p. 130; Gatlus, ii. 398, Eng. tr. p. 308. 
For 5^as see on xv. 8 : it occurs again xi. 33, but not in the 
parallels Mt xiii 15 ; ML iv. ai. Instead of aiccifei Mt and Mt 
have th* more definite wo rov MO&OV, which Lk. has XL ^ As 


isa "lamp," Xux*aa, is a " lamp-stand," on which several 
might be placed or hung: for, whereas the Aa/wmfc was 
fixed, the Ar^os was portable* Other forms of XV^UL are Ay^t'ov 
and Ayxraov (Kennedy, Sources of N.T. Grk. p. 40). Comp. the 
very similar passage xi. 33. In both passages ol eWopevo/ievo*, 
the Gentiles, are mentioned instead of ol w r OLKL^ the Jews (Mt 
xiii. 15). 

17* The poetic rhythm and parallelism should be noticed. 
Somewhat similar sayings are found in profane writers: ay 84 
vpos 0ws TTJV aXyOftav xpovos (Menander) ; comp. Soph. Ajax, 646, 
and Wetst on Mt x. 26. For Qavep&v ye^o-crai see on iv. 36 ; 
Mt has airo/coXv^^o-erai, ML favtpvQ'fi. For diroKpu<J>ov, " hidden 
away" from the public eye, see Lft on CoL ii. 3. It was a 
favourite word with the Gnostics to indicate their esoteric books, 
which might not be published. Comp. the very similar passage 
xil 2 ; and see S. Cox in the Expositor^ 2nd series, L pp. 186, 
372, and Schanz, ad loc. 

18. |3XirT oS? TTWS dicoJeTc. Because the doctrine received 
must be handed on and made known to all, therefore it is all-im- 
portant that it should be rightly heard, viz. with intelligence and 
a "good heart" (ver. 15). Whoever gives a welcome to the word 
and appropriates it, becomes worthy and capable of receiving 
more. But by not appropriating truth when we recognize it, we 
lose our hold of it, and have less power of recognizing it in the 
future. There is little doubt that 8 SoiccZ IXCIK means " that which 
he thinketh he hath." Wic. has " weneth " \ Tyn. and Cran. " sup- 
poseth"; Cov. and Rhem. "thinketh." "Seemeth" comes from 
Beza's videtur. It is ^^deception that is meant Those who 
received the seed by the wayside were in this condition; they 
failed to appropriate it, and lost it. Comp. xix. 26. 

Mk. here inserts (iv. 24) the $ /ter/ww ^er/octre, jc.r.X, which 
Lk. has already given in the sermon (vi. 38) : and both Mt and 
Mk. here add o&er parables, two of which Lk. gives later (xiil 

19-2L The Visit of His Mother and His Brethren. Chrisf s 
true Relations. Mt (xiL 46-5) and Mk. (iii. 31-35) place this 
incident before the parable of the Sower ; but none of the three 
state which preceded in order of time. Comp. xi 27, 28, and 
see on xL 29. On the "Brethren of the Lord" see Lange, Leben 
fisu, ii 2, 13, Eng. tn I p. 329; Lft Gatatians, pp. 253-291, 
in his Dissertations on the Apostolic Age, pp. 345, Macmillan, 
1892 ; J. B. Mayor, Epistle of S. James^ pp. v-xxxvi, Macmillan, 
1892.! ZL. 2 artt "Brother"; "James"; "Judas, the Lord's 

1 The work as a whole, and the dissertation on this question in particular, 
deserve special commendation. 


19. fU^cyt'Cro St irpus auroK rj jJUQTijp Kal ol dSeX^ol auroS. 
F'JT th--- v v--rl>, which is a favourite with Lk*, see on vii 4. Here 
Mk. h.^ i' ; >\>rat and Mt i'ni In writing the sing. Lk. is think- 
ing o:!y of // pfr'tP* Such constructions are common, and do 
;*oi imply th*t the first in the series of nominatives was em- 
^hatic or specially prominent, except in the writer's thoughts. 
fJonip. Jn. xviii. 15, xx. 3 ; Acts xxvi 30; Philem. 23. 

The precise relationship to be understood from the expression 
01 dScX$o. atJroo will probably never be determined or cease to be 
discussed There is nothing in Scripture to warn us from what is 
the antecedently natural view that they are the children of Joseph 
and Mary, unless ** I know not a man * (I 34) is interpreted as 
implying a vow of perpetual virginity. The "j&y/born " in iL 7 
and the imptifect followed by "till" in Mt i. 25, seem to imply 
that Joseph and Mary had children ; which is confirmed by con- 
temporary belief (Mk. vi. 3; Mt xiiL 55) and by the constant 
attendance of the (!3eX^oc on the Mother of the Lord (Mt. xil 
46 ; Mk. iii. 32 ; Jn. ii. 12). The Epiphanian theory, which givea 
Joseph children older than Jesus by a former wife, deprives Him 
of His rights as the heir of Joseph and of the house of David. 
It seems to be of apocryphal origin (Gospel according to Peter, or 
B^k t*f James) ; and, like Jerome's theory of cousinship, to have 
;,een invented in the interests of asceticism and of & priori con- 
victions re&pecting the perpetual virginity of Mary. Tertullian, 
in dealing with this passage, seems to assume as a matter of 
course that the aScA^W are the children of Mary, and that she 
and they were here censured by Christ (Marcion. iv. 19; De 
Carne Ckristi y vii.). He knows nothing of the doctrine of a 
sinless Virgin. Renan conjectures that James, Joses, Simon, 
and Judas were the cousins of Jesus, but that the brethren who 
refused to believe in Him were His real brethren (V.dcJ.ty 23). 
This solution remains entirely his own, for it creates more diffi- 
culties than it solves. See Expositor** Bibk> James and Jude> chu 
iii., Hodder, 1891. 

Elsewhere in bibL Grt a Mac, viii 14 only. 

A fitvoorite word (w. 34, 36, 47, vH 18, 22, k, 36, xiil i, 
etc.). Here Mt has elrc* 34 rtf and Mk. has X^yowrw. The Xry6vrwr is 
certainly spurious : om. KBDLAS, Latt Goth. etc. 

2L- JI^TTJP JJLOU Kal dBc\4oL pou. Note the absence of the article 
in all three accounts. This is the predicate, and oSrot, *.r.X, is 
the subject And the meaning is not are " My actual mother or 
brethren," which would be ^ ^^TTJP /w *ai ol dScX^of pav, but 
w Mother to Me and brethren to Me," *. equal to such, equally 
dear. Mt and Mk. have the singular here : ovros or avros /ton 
jcal dScX^ jcal frfrqp forw. We cannot infer from <ol 


that IBs sisters were present : they had settled at Nazareth 
(Mt xiil 36 ; ML vi. 3). The texts of Mk. iii. 32, which repre- 
sent the multitude as telling Jesus that His sisters are with His 
Mother and brethren, are probably the result of this inference, 
AD and some Latin authorities insert "and Thy sisters"; 
K B C G K L and most Versions omit the words. Christ's reply 
is not a denial of the claims of family ties, nor does it necessarily 
imply any censure on His Mother and brethren. It asserts that 
there are far stronger and higher claims. Family ties at the best 
are temporal; spiritual ties are eternal Moreover, the closest 
blood-relationship to the Messiah constitutes no ckim to ad- 
mission into the Kingdom of God. No one becomes a child of 
God in virtue of human parentage (Jn, L 13). Jesus does not 
say ircrnqp pov 9 not merely because Joseph was not present, but 
because in the spiritual sense that relationship to Christ is filled 
by God alone. See on ver. n. 

22-25. The Stilling of the Tempest on the Lake of ^Gennesaret 
This is the first of a pair of miracles which appear in the same 
order in all three Gospels (ML viil 23 ff. ; Mk. iv. 35 ff.), the 
second being the healing of the demoniacs in the country of the 
Gadarenes. To these two Mk. and LL add the healing of the 
woman with the issue and the raising of the daughter of Jairus, 
which Mt pkces somewhat later. The full series gives us a 
group of representative miracles exhibiting Christ's power over 
the forces of nature and the powers of hell, over disease and over 

22. 'Ey&ero 84 Iv ju$ TUP ijjipG>i> icol afirfo AH these ex- 
pressions are characteristic, and exhibit Aramaic influence. See 
note at the end of ch. L, and comp. v. i, 12, 17, vL 12. There is 
nothing like them in Mk. iv. 35 or Mt viii 23, and ev p.i$ r&v 
ij/tepoiv is peculiar to LL (v. 17, xx. i). Comp. iv /u TWK 
iroX&sv (v. 12) and ev rw <rway<ay&v (xiii. 10). Mt tells us 
that it was the sight of the multitudes around Him that moved 
Jesus to order a departure to the other side of the lake ; and 
Mk. says that the disciples " leaving the multitude, take Him with 
them, e /en as He was in the boat" This seems to imply that 
He was utterly tired, overcome by the demands which the multi- 
tude made upon Him. For Si&dufUK see on iL 15. The nautical 
expression dvaye<r0ai is freq. in LL and peculiar to him (Acts 
xiii. 13, xvL n, xviii 21, xx. 3, 13, xxL 2, xxvii. a, 4, 12, 21, xxviiL 
10, n). 

S3. irXccSmiK SI afrrwF d^JirKwcrev. Excepting Rev. xviii. 17, 
Tr\ is peculiar to LL (Acts xxi 3, xxvii 2, 6, 24). In Antk. 
Pal 9. 517, d^nrfo means " awaken from sleep." Here it means 
" fall off to sleep, * a use which seems to be medical and late 
(HeliocL ix. 12). In class. GrL we should rather have 


(Lob. Phryn* p. 224). This is the only passage in which we read 
of Jesus <^*eping. 

KarejSt] Xa : Xa?Jr d^jiou. "There came down a violent squall of 
wind,** from the heights which surround the lake. These are 
furrowed with ravines like funnels, down which winds rush with 
great velocity. See Thomson, Land &* Book^ p. 375; Keim, 
iv. p. 179, who quotes Rubcgger, Rciseri^ Hi. p. 136. For \al\a4 
comp. Job pi. 1 8, xxxviii. i ; WikL v. 14, 23; Ecclus. xlviii. 9; 
Horn. //. xil 375, xvil 57. ML gives the effect of it as a-curp&s 
ftryas iy rjj #aAaor<n;. For the accent comp. KoAavpoifr, jcA,t/ia, 
(tr.A. f and see Chandler, $ 668. 

eruwrXTjpooKTo. The verb occurs only here, ix. 51, and Acts 
ii. r. Note the imperf. in contrast to Karc/fy. The squall came 
down with a single rush ; the filling of the boat continued and 
was r.ot completed. What was true of the boat is stated of the 
crew. In class. Grk. the act. is used of manning ships thoroughly 
(Thuc. vL 50. 2). 

24. 'EirwrrrfTa, ImffrdrcL See on v. 5. The doubling of the 
name is here peculiar to Lk. Comp. x 41, xxii. 31 Acts ix. 4, 
xxiL 7, xxvi. 14. ML has Kvptc, Mk. AtWovcoXc. Augustine has 
some good remarks as to the differences between the exclama- 
tions attributed to the disciples in the three narratives. " There is 
no need to inquire which of these exclamations was really uttered. 
For whether they uttered some one of these three, or other words 
which no one of the Evangelists has recorded, yet conveying the 
same sense, what does it matter? " (Dt Cons. Evang. 11. 24, 25). 

^TreTt^KjcrcK T dWjiw ical T icXtfSavu This does not prove that 
Lk. regarded the storm as a personal agent ; both the wind and 
its effect are "rebuked," a word which represents the disciples' 
view of the action. See on iv. 39. A icXif&w (icXv civ, " wash 
against") is larger than a KV/WX (Jas. L 6; Jon. L 4, 12; Wisd. 
xiv. 5 ; i Mac. vi. n ; 4 Mac. viL 5, xv. 31). 

yoX^yij. ML and ML add fteyoXiy: the word is common 
elsewhere, but in N.T. occurs only in this narrative. The sudden 
calm in the sea showed the reality of the miracle. Wind may 
cease suddenly, but the water which it has agitated continues to 
work for a long time afterwards. In Mk., as here, the stilling of 
the tempest precedes the rebuke : ML transposes the order of the 
two incidents. In both the rebuke is sharper than in LL, who 
"ever spares the Twelve * (Schanz). See on vL 13 and xxiL 45. 

fiC. How ij Trm$ &fiwK; They might have been sure that the 
Messiah would not perish, and that their prayer for help would be 
answered It is not their praying for succour that is blamed, but 
their want of faith in the result of their prayer: they feared that their 
prayer would be vain. Comp. His parents' anguish, and see on ii. 48. 

{ fya o3r6? c<mr; ML has rororos, There is nothing in- 


credible in the question. Their ideas of the Christ and His 
powers were very imperfect ; and this was probably the first time 
that they had seen Him controlling the forces of nature. Their 
experience as fishermen told them how impossible it was in the 
natural course that such a storm should be followed immediately 
by a great calm. The fear which accompanies this question or 
exclamation is not that which the storm produced, but that which 
was caused by a sudden recognition of the presence of super- 
natural power of a kind that was new to them. Comp. v. 26, 
vil 16. For the apa comp. xxii. 23 ; Acts xiL 18. 

One conjectures that the framer of a legend would have made the disciples 
accept the miracle as a matter of course : comp. v. 8, 9. Keim opposes Strauss 
for rejecting the whole as a myth, although he himself by no means accepts the 
whole as historical. " Unquestionably there rests upon this brief and pregnant 
narrative a rare majesty, such as does not reappear in the other nature-miracles. 
With a few masterly strokes there is here sketched a most sublime picture from 
the life of Jesus, and a picture full of truth. . . . Even His rising up against 
weather and sea is told by Mt and Lk. quite simply, without ar^r ostentation ; 
and the tentative query of the disciples, after their deliverance was accomplished, 
Who is this? is the slightest possible, the only too modest and yet the true 
utterance of the impression which they must at that time have received " (Jes. 
. iv. p. 180). See Gould on Mk. iv. 41. 

26-39. The Healing of the Demoniac in the Country of the 

Gerasenes seems to be the true reading both here and Mk. v. i, while 
Gadarenes is best attested Mt via. 28 ; but in all three places the authorities 
vary between Gerasenes, Gadarenes, and Gergesenes. The evidence here is 
thus summarized 

Ta,, ART A An etc., Syrr. (Cur-Pesh-Sin-Harcl txt) Goth. 
TcpcurqvGv, B C* (ver. 37, hiat ver. 26) D, Latt Syr-Hard ing. 
Tcpyc<ri)vuir, # LXS> Syr-Hier. Boh. Arm. Aeth. See WH. 
ii. App. p. n. If Lk. viii. 26 stood alone, one might adopt Tepye- 
ffijvwv as possibly correct there ; but the evidence in ver. 37 is con* 
elusive against it. 

These Gerasenes are probably not the people of the Gerasa 
which lay on the extreme eastern frontier of Peraea, over thirty 
miles from the lake : even in a loose description to foreigners Lk. 
would not be likely to speak of the shore of the lake as in the 
country of these Gerasenes. Rather we may understand the 
town which Thomson rediscovered (Land & Book, ii 34-38) 
under the name of Gersa or Kcrsa on the steep eastern bank. 
Gergesa is merely a conjecture of Origen, adopted upon topo- 
graphical grounds and not upon textual evidence. It may be 
rejected in all three narratives. There is no real difficulty of 
phy, whichever reading be adopted. The expression -n\v 
' TCDV P. gives considerable latitude, and may include a great 
i more than the immediate vicinity of the town. Nor is there 
any difficulty in the fact that Mt knows of two demoniacs, 


whereas Lk. and Mk. mention only one. The real difficulties in 
the miracle, for those who believe in the fact of demoniacal 
p<>,st * ion, are connected with the swine, i. Can beings which 
ar. purely spiritual enter and influence beings which are purely 
aniinul? 2, How can we justify the destruction of the swine, 
which were innocent creature^, and which belonged to persons 
who do not ^eem to have merited such a heavy loss ? 

On the first of these two questions our ignorance is so great 
that we do not even know whether there is a difficulty. Who can 
explain how mind acts upon matter, or matter upon mind ? Yet 
the fact is as certain, as that mind acts upon mind or that matter 
acts upon matter. There is nothing in experience to forbid us 
from belL'vsng that evil spirits could act upon brute beasts; and 
science :d;uiis that it has "no a priori objection to offer" to such 
an hypothecs. And if there is no scientific objection to demoniacal 
p r - -e-*iun of bratvi, jt fortiori there is none to that of men, 
j.'Jn^ that men !u\e both bodies and spirits to be influenced. 
TIu influence may have been analogous to that of mesmerism or 
hypnotism. The real diffculty is the moral one. As Huxley puts 
it, u the wanton destruction of other people's property is a mis- 
deni.jnour of evil example." The answers are very various. 
i. Tlu vthultf btory is a myth. 2. The healing of the demoniacs 
and the repute of the Healer by the inhabitants are historical, but 
the incident of the swine is a later figment. 3. The demoniacs 
fnjfrtuied the swine, and the transfer of demons from them to the 
swine was imagined 4. The drowning of the swine was an 
accident, possibly simultaneous with the healing, and report mixed 
up the two incidents. 5. The demoniacs were mere maniacs, 
whom Jesus cured by humouring their fancies ; and His giving 
leave to imaginary demons to enter into the swine, produced the 
story of the disaster to the herd. All these explanations assume 
that the Gospel narratives are wholly or in part unhistoricaL But 
there are other explanations. 6. Like earthquakes, shipwrecks, 
pestilences, and the like, the destruction of the swine is part of the 
mystery of evil, and insoluble. 7. As the Creator of the universe, 
the incarnate Word had the right to do what He pleased with His 
own. 8. A visible effect of the departure of the demons was 
necessary to convince the demoniacs and their neighbours of the 
completeness of the cure. Brutes and private property may be 
sacrificed, where the sanity and lives of persons are concerned. 
9. The keepers of the swine were Jews, who were breaking the 
Jewish law, which was binding on them, and perhaps on the whole 
district "In the enforcement of a law which bound the con- 
science, pur Lord had an authority such as does not belong to the 
private individual" (W. E. Gladstone, Nineteenth Century, Feb. 
1891, p. 357). Against this it is contended that the swineherds 


were probably pagans, and that the district was not under Jewish 
law (^ C. Dec. 1890, p. 967 , March 1891, p. 455). Certainty is 
not attainable, but it is probable that one of the last tv, o reasons 
is the true explanation. See Expositor^ 3rd series, 1889, ix. 303. 
Godet's conclusion seems to be sound, that it is one of tho<e cases 
in which the power to execute the sentence guarantees the right 
of the judge. 1 Contrast the healing of a demoniac woman as 
recorded in the Gospel of the Infancy , xiv. 

26. KaT&rXcucrai' els rt\v \6pav TWP rcpcunjKWK rjns l<rnv dmircpcu 
" They landed at the country of the Gerasenes, which is in such a 
position as to be opposite Galilee*" The verb is quite class, of 
coming to land from the high seas, but is found here only in N.T. 
Not in LXX. See Smith, Voyage and Shipwreck of S. Paul, p. 28, 
and reff. in Wetst The statement tells us nothing as to the 
position of the country of the Gerasenes, for "opposite" would 
apply to the whole of the east shore. Lk. alone mentions its 
being " opposite Galilee " ; perhaps to justify its inclusion in the 
Galilean ministry, 

Some texts have T^/JO* from Mt, or Mk., while others have foTiTtpw, of 
which dvTLTrdpa is a later form. Another form is drrix^/xty. For the accent 
see Chandler, 867. 

27. fttrf\vTt[atv Aw^p TIS IK. TIJS iro'Xctts. The man belonged to 
the city, but he came out of the tombs to meet Jesus: & <rij$ 
TToXccos belongs to dvrjp TIS, not to fartyrryjev. For this force of 
VTTO in composition comp. foroKptvo/wu, "answer back"; faoXo- 
yto/Mu, " reckon per contra" vTrocrrpc^o), "turn back." For ucu-w 
see on vii. 12; and for i^SJo-aro see Burton, 48. Lk. alone 
mentions that the demoniac wore no clothes; but Mk. implies it 
by stating that he was clothed after he was cured All three 
mention the tombs ; and near the ruins of Khersa there are many 
tombs hewn in the rocks. Excepting Mk. v, 3, 5 and Rev. xi. 9, 
jinjfia is peculiar to Lk. (xxiii. 53, xxiv. i; Acts ii. 29, vii. 16); 
but he more often uses /n/if/iclov. With Ij&crcv comp. xax. 5, xxiv. 29. 

28. Ti jxoi K<H CTOL; See on iv. 34. 

*lT]o-ou ut TOU GeoO TOU u4uorou. This expression rather indicates 
that die man is not a Jew, and therefore is some evidence that the 
owners of the swine were not Jews. "The Most High" (Elyon} 
is a name for Jehovah which seems to be usual among heathen 
nations. It is employed by Melchisedek, the Canaanite priest and 
king (Gen. xiv. 20, 22). Balaam uses it (Num. xxiv. 16). Micah 
puts it into the mouth of Balaam (vi 6) ; Isaiah, into the mouth 
of the king of Babylon (xiv. 14). It is used repeatedly in the 
Babylonian proclamations in Daniel (iiL 26, iv. 24, 32, v. 18, 21, 

1 See some valuable remarks by Sanday in the Contcmp. Rev. Sept. 1893, 19. 
348. He inclines to the second explanation, but with reserve. 


vii. 1 8, 22, 25, 27). The girl with a spirit of divination at Philippl 
vT.pioys it (ActsxvL 17). It is found in Phoenician inscriptions 
uKo. See Chadwick, Sf. Mark, p. 144, and Wsctt on Heb. viL i. 
I or $urf} p-eydX-jj see on L 42, and for Sop<u see on v. 12 : with 
a^aicpaias of demoniac cries comp. iv. 41 ; Acts viii. 7. 

p) j Pao-aw<77]s. Neither the verb nor its cognate substantive 
'a ever u^ed in N.T. of testing metals, or of obtaining evidence by 
torture, but simply of pain or torment The demoniac identifies 
himself with the demon ^hich controls him, and the torment 
*vhich is feared Is manifest from vet. 31. 

29. irapiJYYfM'fv Y*P T< ? irvV|xaTu Authorities are very evenly 
ridded between the impvrf. and the aor. If Tap^yyciXe? be right, it almost 
means '* He had ordered." Burton, 29, 48. We should have expected TO& 
wvww?, for both ,n \er. 27 and ver. 30 we have SaipAna. But the inter- 
f \ . ' 'i 1 cf pe^nnahty I "tween the man and the demons is so rapid, that it 
IJHC *mes r<at iril to " jv ti k of the demons in the sing* Note that while Lk* 

as his c , ,-^'r. !!' <;-X^tr d-6 (w 33, 38, iv. 35, 41, v. 8, etc.), Mk. 

,r- th* n 

ots 'yap XP^ VOL ^ flrvvrjpirttKci avr<$v. ** Many times," *".^. on many 
, r?;///j #'?'/* * r w (Vu'^.), "it had seized him," or "earned hun 

Acts C \\H 15. M'-* has ir^XXawr. Others explain " within 
a lJr.y t.^v } See V:n. ^xxi 9, p, 273. The verb is quite class., but in 
X.T. p . ,^r to Lk. } Acts vi. 12, xix. 28, nvu. 15). Hobart counts it as 
medicu* p. 244). In LXX, Prov. vi. 25 ; 2 Mac. 111. 27, iv. 41. 

ical ir^Sois. Both Lk. and Mk. use these two words 
to distinguish the " handcuffs and fetters," manic& etpedicK, with 
vhich he was bound. See Lft Phil p. 8. The former is used of 
the cha.n by which the hand of a prisoner was fastened to the 
soldier who 'had charge of him. Like " chains," oXvo-as are of 
metal, whereas irlSat might be ropes or withes. Both dAvow and 
W&u are included in ra Sco^a. The imperfects tell of what 
usually took place. During the calmer intervals precautions were 
taken to prevent the demons "carrying him away with" them; 
but these precautions always proved futile. 

is TCL? eprj^ous. In order to take the man away from humane 
influences. But the wilderness is regarded as the home of evil 
spirits. See on xi. 24 ; and for the plural see on L 80. 

30. Tt o-oi OTOJUL< corty; In order to recall the man to a sense 
of his own independent personality, Jesus asks him his name. It 
was a primary condition of his cure that he should realize that he 
is not identical with the evil powers which control his actions. 
Perhaps also Christ wished the disciples to know the magnitude of 
the evil, that the cure might increase their faith (ver. 25) : and this 
purpose may have influenced Him in allowing the destruction of 
the swine. The peculiar word ArywSv, 1 which is preserved in ML 

1 That the man had ever seen a Roman legion, "at once one and many, 
cruel and inexorable and strong," is perhaps not probable. But see Trenclr* 
//>A ft f t p. 1 7 1* 8th ed. For other Latin words comp. ac. 35, ad. 33, *i*- 20, 


v. 9 also, is a mark of authenticity. As Sanday points out, it is 
more probable that this strange introduction of a Latin word 
should represent something which really took place, than that it 
should be pure invention (Contemp. Rev. Sept, 1892, p. 349), 
The words on elcn]\0ei> Batata iroXXi ls aMv are the remark 
of the Evangelist: comp. ii. 50, iiL 15, xxiiL 12. 

31* irapicdXouF afrro>. "They kept beseeching Him." The 
plurality of those who ask is emphatically marked : with Sai/wW 
we might have expected ?rapKeX, as in ML The plur. would 
have been less noticeable in ML, because the masc. plur., 

K, precedes* 

That ro/MJcdXovr (KBCDFLS, Latt. Goth.)andnot ropt&is right 
here, need not be doubted* 

is TTJV apuoxrov, In class, GrL o/ftycro-os is always an adj., 
"bottomless, boundless," and is mostly poetical In LXX y 
a/focro-os is used of the sea (Gen. L 2, viL n ; Job xli. 22, 23); 
without the art (Job xxviiL 14, xxxvi 16; Ecdus. i 3, xvl 18) ; 
of the depths of the earth (Ps. Ixxi. 20 ; Deut viii. 7) ; but per- 
haps nowhere of Hades. In N.T. it means Hades (Rom. x. 7), 
and esp. the penal part of it which is the abode of demons (Rev. 
ix. i-n, xL 7, xviL 8, xx. i, 3). The latter is the meaning here. 
The demons dread being sent to their place of punishment See 
Cremer, Lex. sub v* In ML the petition is " that He will not 
send them out of the country " ; but the verb is sing, and the man 
is the petitioner. He still confuses himself with the demons, and 
desires to stay where he feels at home. This is their wish and 
his also. The persistent confusion of personality renders it " 
necessary that the man should have some decisive evidence of 
the departure of the evil spirits from him. In this way his cure 
will be effected with least suffering, Prof. Marshall thinks that fe 
n?v a/?wnrov and Io> -n?s x<!>P a * ^ a 7 represent Aramaic expressions 
so nearly alike as readily to be confounded by copyist or trans- 
lator (Expositor, Nov. 1891, p. 377). See footnote on v. 31. 

32. &Y&TJ xot'pw" licai'wy. This illustrates the fondness of Lk. 
for tjcavos in this sense : Mt has ay. -^pifxav voXX&v and Mk. ay. 
Xotpw /teyaAty With characteristic love of detail ML gives the 
number as o>s SMrxtXtot, which may be an exaggeration of the 
swineherds or of the owners, who wished to make the most of 
their loss. Had the number been an invention of the narrator, 
we should have had 4000 or 5000 to correspond with the legion. 
It is futile to ask whether each animal was possessed. If some 
of them were set in motion, the rest would follow mechanically. 
For the ^reVpc^ev avroTs of LL and ML we have the direct 
&rayer in Mt, which need mean no more than * depart, be gone." 
Bat the distinction between commanding and allowing what He 


might have forbidden is not very helpful Whatever the motive of 
thy dernons> may have been, Je&us uses it for a good end, and 
secures the easy and effectual cure of their victim. 

38. pjjw|<yK $ &y&i) Kara TOO Kpqpou. These words also are 
in all three. The word Kp^/wos need not mean an abrupt pre- 
cipice: a steep and rocky slope suffices. MacGregor, Stanley, 
Tr^tram, Wilson, and others believe that the spot which suits the 
description can be identified. The art. implies that it was well 
known. Comp. 2 Chron. xxv. 12. The use of dircTnaytj for 
suffocation by drowning is classical (Dem. p. 883). 

34. TO yeyoKos. Chiefly the destruction of the swine. In ver. 
36 r,l ccoiTC9 means the disciples and others near to Jesus, not the 

35-39. Note how the characteristics of Lk.'s diction stand out in these 
ver^. For rfo Wpwov d#' oB r. 5. ttyXder (see on ver. 29) Mk. has r6r 
*a**Gj'tf&aj'oi', and rapA TO&J r63as (see on vii. 38) has no equivalent in 
Mc* For dnfvyetXctr (see on ver. 20) Mk. has 8njyi!ffa,vTO t while S.TO.W 
i:i, 21), rdrX^ot (see oni. 10), 0<>j3vA*7<iX^(see onL 42, vii, 16), 

Kee on iv. 38), and {nrtffrpe\f/ev (see on L 56) have no 

; for 6 

equivalents. For Metro (see on v. 12) Mk. has vapcKdXei ; 

ov 4$e\Tj\i6ci (see on ver. 29) Mk. has the less accurate 6 ftu/Aowfffclr ; for 

vvr /see on L 56) ML has fterd ; and for vTbrrpcQc (see on L 56) Mk. has 


35. IjiaTicrfi&oi'. Some of the bystanders ma/ havf* given him 
clothing ; but there would have been time to fetch IL The verb 
is found neither in LXX nor in profane writers, but only here and 
Mk. v, 15. The irapi rods TroSas implies an attitude of thankful- 
ness rather than that he has become a disciple. It is the last of 
the four changes that have taken place in the man. He is 
Ka&fawov instead of restless, i/wmoyicvov instead of naked, o-co<po- 
rowra instead of raging, and irapa TOVS TroSas rov 'I. instead of 
shunning human society. Baur would have it that he is meant to 
represent the conversion of the Gentiles. We are not sure that 
he was a Gentile ; and this would have been made clear if he was 
intended as a representative. For Trapd with the ace. after a verb 
of rest comp. Acts x. 6 ; ML xiii. i, xx. 30; Mk. v, 21, x. 46. 

36. dinjyyeiXaK 8e aftrois. This is not a repetition of ver. 34, 
but a statement of additional information which was given to the 
townspeople after they arrived on the scene. 

37. airaKT^ irXtj0o$. The desire that He should depart was 
universal, and all three narratives mention it. The people feared 
that His miraculous power might lead to further losses : and this 
feeling was not confined to the inhabitants of the iroAts dose at 
handover. 34) ; it was shared by the whole districL Comp. iv. 29, 
ix. 53, and contrast iv. 42 ; Jn. iv. 40. Although Keim rejects 
the incident of the swine, yet he rightly contends that this request 


that Jesus should leave the place gives the impression of a sober 
historical fact. There is nothing like it elsewhere in the history 
of Jesus ; and neither it nor the locality is likely to have been 
invented. Why should a myth take Jesus across to Gerasa? 
Some historical connexion with the locality is much more 

88. &eiTo 81 auroG 6 di^p. The 8e marks the contrast between 
Him and the rest Mk. says that the request was made as Jesus 
was stepping into the boat Mt omits the whole incident The 
man fears the unfriendly populace, and clings to his preserver. 

80. SnfjY ^ 5<ra <rot fn-owjo-cv 6 0co$. In Galilee and Judsea, 
where Jesus and His disciples preached, He commonly told those 
who were healed to be silent about their cures. In this half- 
heathen Penea there were no other missionaries, and the man was 
not fitted for permanent work with Christ elsewhere. Moreover, 
here there was no danger of the miracle being used for political 
purposes* Lastly, it might be beneficial to a healed demoniac to 
have free converse with all after his gloomy isolation. The 6 9<$f 
is last with emphasis. Jesus shows the man that he must attribute 
his deliverance to God. Both Lk, and ML preserve the highly 
natural touch that, in spite of this command, the man proclaimed 
what Jesus had done for him. Note also that xo#' oX/yv TT/V o-oAi? 
is much in excess of t& rov ot/cov o-ov, and KTjpvcro-av of Swjycw. See 
on be 10. 

Kcff SXijv Tfjv ir^Xiv. With jnypArcrwr, not with dr$}X0> : Win. xluc. cL 
* P* 499- Mk* has & rj} Ae/eoir6\i. Nowhere else in N.T. does KO& 
aXi7? occur: Lk. commonly writes xaB r fays (iv. 14, aoiii. 5 ; Acts ix. 31, 42, 
x. 37). He nowhere mentions Decapohs. 

40-56. The Healing of the Woman with the Issue and the 
Raising of the Daughter of Jairus. Mt ix. 18-26 ; Mk. v. 21-43. 
The name of Bernice (Veronica) for this woman first appears in 
the Acts of Pilate, Gospel 'of ' Nicodemus> Pt. I. ch. vii. Respecting 
the statues, which Eusebius saw at Cesarea, and which he believed 
to represent Christ and this woman, see H. E. viL 18. 1-3. 
Sozomen says that Julian removed the statue of Christ and sub- 
stituted one of himself, which was broken by a thunderbolt (v. 21). 
Philostorgius says the same (vii. 3). Malalas gives the petition 
in which the woman asked Herod Antipas to be allowed to erect 
the memorial (Chrongr. x 306-8). That the statues existed, and 
that Christians thus misinterpreted their meaning, need not be 
doubted. Pseudo-Ambrosius would have it that the woman was 
Martha the sister of Lazarus, 

4O-48. In these verses also the marks of Lk.*s style are very conspicuous 
(see above on v. 35-39). In ver. 40 we have tv $$ r$ r. infix, (see on iu. 21), 
i)TOffTpt<}>i9 (see on i. 56), dreS^aro (see on ver, 40), %<ra.w c. partidp* 
(see on L 10), rdrret (see on be. 43), and r/>oo > $ox&i're$ (see on Hi. 15). In 


TCT. 41, eel I8o$ (see on i. 20), ical oSrot (i. 36), $*%pxtv (see on fer. 41;, 
TapA roi's r 6$a (s?e on viu 38). In ver. 42, xal atrii (see on L 17) and tv 
9i T(f C* in/in* In ver* 44, irapa%p^a (see on v. 25). In ver. 45, vdvruf 
(vi. 30, vii. 35) and ^irtirrara (v. 5J. In ver. 46, eA0?x dr6 (see on iv. 
35). In Vwf. 47, dnj77f*Xf* (see on ver. 20), tv&inov (see on i. 15), 
Ta.rT&t t rou Xaov, t*d #7, and rapaxprjua. Not one of these expression! it 
found in the parallel passages in Mt. ana Mk. See on iz. 28-36. 

4O, direB^aTo. Peculiar to Lk. (ix.ii; Acts il 41, xviii. 37, 
XXL 17, xxiv. 3, xxviiL 30, and possibly xv. 4). The meaning is 
they "received Him with pleasure, welcomed Him" (Euthym. 
TheophyL Schanz). See on iv. 42 and on xi. 29. In class. Grk. 
the verb means "accept as a teacher, as an authority," or "admit 
arguments as valid " : so in Xen. Plat Arist etc. 

4L 'Idctpos. The same name as Jair (Num. xxxil 41 ; Judg. 
x. 3 . It is strange that the name ( = " he will give light ") should 
be used as an argument against the historical character of the 
narrative. It is not very appropriate to the circumstances, 

uinjpx**'. Very freq in Lk., esp. in Acts ; not in ML Mk. or Jn, 
The ue of this verb as almost equivalent to clva is the beginning 
of the modern usage. But the classical meaning of a present 
state connected with a previous state still continues in N.T. (ix. 
48, xi. 13, xvL 14, 23, xxiii. 50). See Sp. Comm. on i Cor. vii 
26. Here also Christ does not refuse the homage (iv. 8), as Peter 
(Acts x. 26) and the Angel (Rev. xix. 10) do. 

42. jioroyenqs. As in the cases of the widow's son and the 
lunatic boy (vii. 12, ix. 38), this fact may have influenced Christ 
On all three occasions Lk. alone mentions the fact 

frwv Srf&cKo. A critical time in a girl's life. Not only Lk., 
who frequently notes such things (ii 36, 37, 42, iiL 23, xiii. n), 
but Mk, also gives the age. All three mention that die woman 
with the issue had been suffering for twelve years. For dir^mrjo-Ke* 
Mk. has tcrxartys l^et and Mt apn rXcvnj(rcv. The reason for 
the difference between Mt and the others is plain. Lk. and Mk, 
give the arrivals, both of the father, who says, " She is dying," and 
of the messenger, who says, "She is dead." Mt condenses the 
two into one. 

cruK&myoi'. Mk. has owc^At/fov, which is less strong : see on 
yer. 14. In both cases the crw expresses the pressing together all 
round Him. The crowd which had been waiting for Him (ver. 40) 
now dings to Him in the hope of witnessing a miracle. 

43, o&ra fr f wcu *' Being in a condition of hemorrhage.** The 
constr, is quite simple and intelligible ; comp. & <pQop$, fr tamUr, p 5oc& 
r ^xrere^, fr tyBpq- The form ^iVts is from the unused /Ww, from whii 
come the late forms fypwra and fypvica., and fawn is often a v*L Win. xxix. 
3. bp.23a 

Urpot* vpocrayaX^o-ao-a &Xov r&v P(OV. " Having, in addition U all 
tor suffering^ speot all her resoorcet on physicians," or "for physician** of 

fin. 43-45;) THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 235 

in physicians." This use of plot for "means of living* Is freq. in N.T. 

(xv. 12, 30, xxL 4; Mk. xii. 44 ; I Jn. in. 17) and in class. Grk. In 
rk. p 

Grk. plot is a higher word than fwifr, the former being that which is 
peculiar to man, the latter that which he shares with brutes and vegetables. 
In N.T. ploy retains its meaning, beirg either the "period of human life," as 
I Tim. li. 2 ; 2 Tim. ii. 4, or "means of life," as here. But w/j is raised 
above plot, and means that vital principle which through Christ man shares 
with God. Hence ptoy is comparatively rare m N.T., which is not much 
concerned with the duration of temporal life or the means of prolonging it. 
Whereas wij occurs more than a hundred times. See Trench, Syn* xxvii. ; 
Crem Lex p. 272 ; Lft. on Ign. ad Rom. VIL 3. 

WH. follow B D., Arm. in omitting larpott . . . flor. Treg. and RV, 
indicate doubt in marg. Syr-Sin, omits. 

OUK lirxuaev. This use of loyy<* for " be able * is freq. in Lk. 
See on vi. 48. It is natural that " the physician " does not add, 
as Mk. does, that she had suffered much at the hands of the 
physicians, and was worse rather than better for their treatment 
The remedies which they tried in such cases were sometimes very 
severe, and sometimes loathsome and absurd. See Lightfoot, 
p. 614; Tristram, Eastern Customs in Bibk Lands> pp. 22, 23. 

44, -irpoo*X9oucra oma^ -q^aro. She came from behind that 
He might not see her. Her malady made her levitically unclean, 
and she did not wish to own this publicly. Her faith is tinged 
with superstition. She believes that Chrisf s garments heal magic- 
ally, independently of His will. In other cases those who touched 
Him in faith seem to have done so openly. Comp. vL 19; Mt 
xiv. 36 ; Mk. iii. 10, vi. 56. 

a has dt retro : comp. Baruch vi. 5, visa itaqut tvrba & retro 
(Vulg.). Hence the French dtrr&re. 

TOO Kpaorr^Sou TOU lji<mou. " The tassel " rather than "the 
fringe" or "hem of His garment" The square overgarment or 
Tallith had tassels of three white threads with one of hyacinth at 
each of the four comers. Edersh. Z. <5r* T. L p. 624 (but see 
D.B? art " Hem of Garment "). Of the four corners two hung 
in front, and two behind. It was easy to touch the latter without 
the wearer feeling the touch. 

&m] tj puVis. It "stood still, ceased to flow." ML has 
c&lpavQr]. " This is the only passage in the N.T. in which wrravoi 
is used in this sense. It is the usual word in the medical writers 
to denote the stoppage of bodily discharges, and especially such as 
are mentioned here" (Hobart, p. 15). Both irapaxprjfJta, for which 
Mk. has evOvs, and irpoaawiXcSaaou, for which Mk* has oWavrjVacra, 
are also claimed as medical (pp. 16, 96). 

45. There is no reason for supposing that the miracle was 
wrought without the will of Jesus. He knew that someone had 
been healed by touching His garment ; and we may believe that 
He read *he woman's heart as she approached Him in the belief 


tLat He c-ni T 'l heal her. Lk. evidently dates t v ^ cure from her 
touching Hi- ^rnvnt, Mt seems to place it in C"iris*'s words to 
her ; Mk. in f> th places. 

7is 6 uij/ctjiew uw>u; This* does not seem to be one of those 
ca-ci in which Christ a^ked for information. He knew that He 
had been touched with a purpose, and He probably knew who 
had done it. Mk.'s 7re/ne#AtVeTo IStw rqv TOVTO TTQurjcra.Q'av rather 
implies that He knew where to look. For the womarfs sake she 
must be induced to avow her act Note the masc., which makes 
the question all the more general ; Mk. has w pov vtyaro rfw 
fyumW. The verb implies more than touching, "laying hold of." 
For other cafes in which Jesus asked questions of whicn He knew 
the answer comp. xxiv. 17 ; Mk. ix. 33. See some good remarks 
in the 5. JP. C. K. Comm* on Lk. vuL 46. 

dpKoujitVwv 8e irrfjTwj'. This explains, and to some extent excuses, 
Peter's characteristic interference. Lk. alone tells us that Peter 
took the lead in this. See on ix. 20, and comp. Mk. i. 36. Note the 
rcti TUV, and see on ix. 43 and xi. 4. For eiriordTa see on v. 5. 

cruK^xouo-ii' ere. " Hold Thee in, keep Thee a prisoner " ; xix. 
43, xxii. 63 ; comp. iv. 38. Here only in N.T. does diroOXipetK 
occur : Lat ajfiigtre (Vulg,), comprimere (f), contribulare (d) ; om. 

46. eyvw SuVafitf cgeX^XuOutaK dir' ejiou. For the constr. see 
Burton, g 458, and comp. Heb. xiiL 23 ; and for SuVajus see on iv. 


47. rp^fjw>u<ra jjX0cK The irarrov in ver. 45, if taken literally, 
implies that she had previously denied her action. The ^A.0v, 
however, seems to show that she had gone a little way from Him 
after being healed. But she may also have been afraid that she 
had done wrong in touching His garment. Either or both would 
explain the Tpc/iowo-a. She is afraid that the boon may be with- 
drawn. For the attraction SL yv air lav see small print on iii. 19, 
and Burton, 350 : TOV Xaou is also characteristic. 

48. i] Turns ffou owoMclp <T. All three record these words. It 
was the grasp of her faith, not of her hand, that wrought the cure. 
Thus her low view of the manner of Christ's healing is corrected. 

49. IPX^TCU ns Tropct TOU dpxwruKaYcfiyoo. A member of his 
household arrives and tells Jairus that it is now too late. The 
delay caused by the incident with the woman must have been 
agonizing to him. But this trial is necessary for the development 
of his faith, as well as for that of the woman, and Jesus curtails no 
item in His work. The rlQn\Kw is placed first with emphasis. 
For cncdXXc see on vii. 6. See also Blass on Acts x. 44. 

50. MTJ 4> Py> fw5w>y moreuow. Change of tense. " Cease to 
fear; only make an act of faith." In Mk. v. 36 we have /aW 
wforcut, "only continue to believe." In either case the meaning 


Is, " In the presence of this new difficulty let faith prevail, and all 
will be well." For juwf <j)opoG see on L 13. 

51. oujc dcfnJKep ct<7cX6eiF rti/d vbv aura. " Did not allow anyone 
to enter with Him into the room? He and the disciples had 
already entered the house, and the parents had been there from 
the first Here, as in ver. 38, Lk. has <rv v where ML has /UT : 
see on L 56. 

n&poK ical *ludrriv Kai "lrfic<j3o>. The chosen three (OCA.CKT&V 
I*AKO'T/>OI as Clem. Alex, calls them) are probably admitted for 
the sake of the Twelve, whose faith would be strengthened by the 
miracle. These three sufficed as witnesses. Moreover, they were 
in character most fitted to profit by the miracle. Here, as in ix, 
28 and Acts i. 13, John is placed before James. Elsewhere the 
other order, which is almost certainly the order of age, prevails 
(v. 10, vi 14, ix. 51), and always in Mt (iv. 21, x. 2, xvl i) and 
Mk. (i. 19, 29, iii. 17, v. 37, ix. 2, x 35, 41, xiii. 3, riv. 33). 

Irenseus had a text which omitted *ol Iwdnp. Qttintus autcm ingrtssus 
Dominus ad mortucw puelfam suscitazrit earn, nuttum enim, inquit, permisit 
intrare nisi Pttrum tt Jacobum et patrtm et mairem puette (iL 24. 4). No 
existing text makes this omission j but many authorities transpose James and 
John in order to have the usual order (tf A L S X L, Boh. Aeth. Arm. Goth.). 
But the evidence of BCDEFHK, abcdeffi^lqrCod. Am. Cod Brix. 
etc* is decisive. There is similar confusion in ix, 28 and Acts i 13. 

62. ItcXaioK 8e -ir<T$ ical iKoirrovro aur^f. The mourners 
(2 Chron. xxxv. 25 ; Jen ix. 17) were not in the room with the 
corpse : Mt and Mk. tell us that Christ turned them out of the 
house. The iravrcs is again peculiar to Lk. 7 s account: comp. 
w. 40, 45, 47. The aca after JCOTTTO/ZOI is class. (Eur. Tro. 623 ; 
Aristoph. Lys. 396) : " they beat their breasts for her, bewailed 
her." Comp. xxiii. 27 ; Gen. xxiii 2 ; i Sam. xxv. i* 

06 y^p fartfavev dX\& KaOeuScu This declaration is in all three 
narratives. Neander, Olshausen, Keim, and others understand it 
literally ; and possibly Origen is to be understood as taking the 
same view. A miracle of power is thus turned into a miracle of 
knowledge. But the ciSorcs in ver. 53 is conclusive as to the 
Evangelist's meaning: not f supposing,** but "knowing that she 
was dead." The jea0;8tt is rather to be understood in the same 
sense as Aoapo? KfKoifLijrai, (Jru xl n). But the cases are not 
parallel, for there Jesus prevents all possibility of misunderstanding 
by adding Ao&xpos avi6avv. Yet the fact that Jesus has power to 
awaken explains in both cases why He speaks of sleep. We may, 
however, be content, with Hase, to admit that certainty is unattain- 
able as to whether the maiden was dead or in a trance. 

54. KpaT^ous Ttjs x ei P^$ ttfirijs. All three mention that He laid 
hold of her, although to touch a dead body was to incur ceremonial 
uncleanner>s. In like manner He touched the leper ; see on v. 13, 


This laying hold of her hand and the raised voice (e<aJn?crev) are 
consonant with waking one out of sleep, and the two may be 
regarded as the means of the miracle. Comp. and contrast through- 
out Acts ix. 36-42. 

'H irais, yctf>. "Arise, get up," not "awake." Mt omits 
the command ; Mk. gives the exact words, Tahtha cumL For the 
nom. with the art as voc. see on x. 21, xviiL n, 13. For ^oSjrjcrtr 
comp. ver. 8, xvL 24. 

55. Marpcfrv T& weupt afiTrjs. There can be no doubt that 
the Evangelist uses the phrase of the spirit returning to a dead 
body, which is the accurate use of the phrase. Only the beloved 
physician makes this statement In LXX it is twice used of a 
living man's strength reviving; of the fainting Samson (Judg. 
xv. 19), and of the starving Egyptian (i Sam, xxx. 12). Note that 
Lk. has his favourite irapaxp^/ia, where ML has his favourite 
cf&k ; and comp, ver. 44, v. 25, xviiL 43, xxii. 60. 

SilTo&K aurg 8061) pat $ayeiK. This care of Jesus in command- 
ing food after the child's long exhaustion would be of special 
interest to LL In their joy and excitement the parents might 
have forgotten it The charge is somewhat parallel to ISw/cev aurov 
r# pifTpl avrov (vii. 15) of the widow's son at Nain. In each ca$e 
He intimates that nature is to resume its usual course : the old ties 
and the old responsibilities are to begin again. 

6 S irap^yyetXcK aurocs fuqSoa CITTCIK T& yeyo^s. The command 
has been rejected as an unintelligible addition to the narrative. 
No such command was given at Nain or at Bethany. The object 
of it cannot have been to keep the miracle a secret Many were 
outside expecting the funeral, and they would have to be told why 
no funeral was to take place. It can hardly have been Christ's 
intention in this way to prevent the multitude from making a bad 
use of the miracle. This command to the parents would not have 
attained such an object It was given more probably for the 
parents' sake, to keep them from letting the effect of this great 
blessing evaporate in vainglorious gossip. To thank God for it at 
home would be far more profitable than talking about it abroad. 

I2L 1-50. To the Departure for Jerusalem. 
This is the last of the four sections into which the Ministry in 
Galilee (iv. i4~ix. 50) was divided It contains the Mission of the 
Twelve (1-9), the Feeding of the Five Thousand (ro-i?)* the 
Transfiguration (28-36), the Healing of the Demoniac Boy (37-43), 
and two Predictions of the Passion (18-27, 43~5)- 

1-0. The Mission of the Twelve and the Fears of Herod. Mt 
V. 1-15; Mk. vi 7-1 1. Mt is the most full Lk. gives no note 


of time or of connexion, and we may suppose that his sources gave 
him no information. See Weiss, L.J. iL p. 119, Eng. tr. ii. p, 306 
For mention of " the Twelve " see vi. 13, viii. i, ix. 12, xviii. 31 
i- 3> 47- All three mention this summons or invitation on tht 
part of Jesus. Mt and Mk. describe it by their usual irpoa-Ka\icr9at 9 
for which Lk. has owKaXeurflcu, which he more commonly uses in 
his Gospel (ix. i, xv. 6, 9, xxiii. 13), while in the Acts he generally 
uses vpovKaXturOai (iL 39, v. 40, vl 2, xiiL 2, etc.). 

1, Bilmpi' Kal lov<riav. Mt and Mk. have eovcruiv only (see 
on iv. 36^ : Svvafus is the power, efowta the authority to use it 
The Jewish exorcists had neither 8wa/u$ nor cloua-ta, and made 
elaborate and painful efforts, which commonly failed Elsewhere, 
when the two are combined, covo-ta precedes Svi/a/us (iv. 36 ; 
i Con xv. 24; Eph. L 21; i Pet iiL 22). The irovra. with 
SaLfjLovta is peculiar to LL It covers all that would come under 
the head of possession* 

The constr. is not really doubtful : r&rot* GepaTefour depends on 
coi govrfay, and is co-ordinate with 6ri Tdrra, 6atp6rta~ Ouiers make r. 0ep. 
depend on l&wce* and be co-ordinate with Stf*. *. & The least satisfactory 
way is to couple vteovs with daifdpta, and make Bepaarefeu refer to both " : 
" authority over all diseases and demons, to heal them." For this meaning 
Lk. would almost certainly have written 40 feparafce?. He as usual men* 
tions the curing of demoniacs separately from other healings (iv. 40, 41, 
vi. 17, 18, vii. 21, viii. 2, xiii 32). 

After larGoi C etc. ins* rote brOcyovrras from Mt ; AD LS ins. rods 
onu B, Syr-Cur. Syr-Sin. 

Q. Kriptivtrciv T^V ^acrtXetaK TOU Seou Kal tacrOai. These two verbs 
sum up the ministration to men's souls and bodies. See on v. 17. 
Mt adds that they were to raise the dead (x. 8). Mk. tells us that 
they were sent out Svo, Sro, For diroor&Xw see on iv. 18, p. 121. 

3. p]T cj3of. Mk. has el JJLTJ pdpSov \LQVQV (vi 8); and the 
attempts to explain away this discrepancy in a small matter of 
detail are not very happy. As between Mt and Mk* it is possible 
to explain that both mean " Do not procure (icr^crccr^c) a staff for 
the journey, but take (atpoxrtv) the one which you have." But both 
Mk. and Lk. use <uptv, and the one has "Take nothing except a 
staff," while the other has "Take nothing, neither a staff," etc. 
Yet in all three the meaning is substantially the same : " Make no 
special preparations ; go as you are." From xxii 35 we learn that 
the directions were obeyed, and with good results. Lk. says 
nothing about sandals, respecting which there is another discrep- 
ancy between Mt and Mk, unless we are to suppose that vvoSq/uxra 
are different from <ravaXia. 

p]T dpyuptoK. Mk. has \aXKov and Mt has both, jjnjSk apyvpo? 
u,iy$ x^Xicw. Thus Lk. is Greek, and Mk. is Roman, in choice of 
words. In LXX fyyvpu* is very common, fyyvoos comparatively 


rare, while xfe\*J$ is common as a metal, but not in the sense of 

ftfjTc *'<> xiT&ms cxcij'. As no mjpa was allowed, the second 
tjnic, if U*:en, would have to be worn. Hence the form in ML, 
** Pat not on two tunics." Comp. Jos. Ant. xvil 5. 7. 

In ty* 1 * we h,ive an anacnluthon ; change from direct to oblique oration. 
For it is *ca.r"ely adnfo l fc ti take x* as infin. for imperat. The actual 
inrperat. lx*ih precedes {af/wrc) and follows (/x&ere). Win. xhiu 5 d, P- 397 
Mk. here s* siran^e'y abrupt in his mixture of constructions, 

4* &cci ftetyerc KCU licet&cK ^pxe<r0e. Vulg. has <?/ inde ne cxcatis. 
But only one cursive has /*i/ (38). Cod. Brix. has I/I/M? exeatis fir. 
Alt. Th -* meaning is " Go not from house to house," as He charges 
the Seventy In x. 7, a pa*oage which should be compared with this. 
The minion both of the Twelve and of the Seventy was to be 
s:mj>e and quiet, working from fixed centres in each place. This 
i-, the g'jrni of what we find in the apostolic age, " the church that 
is in their house" (Rom. xvi. 5; i Cor, xvi 19; CoL iv. 15; 
Philem 2\ 

5. For BEWITCH see on viii. 13, and for efpx<5ft6vot &ir<5 see on 
i\. 35. In Acts xiii. 51 we find Paul and Barnabas performing this 
$y nodical action of sha'tmu; off the dust It signified that hence- 
sorth they had not the &m illest thing in common with the place, 
It is said that Pharisees performed this action when re-entering 
Judaea from heathen lands. There and in Acts xviii. 6 Lk. uses 
eKTivcW., which Alt. and Mk. have here. For dTronvoo-or. comp. 
Acts xxviiL 5. The eV aurorfs means lit " upon them," and so 
'* against them," Comp. 2 Cor. i. 23 and Acts xiiL 51, and 
contrast 2 Thes. i. 10. Mk, here has avrois. 

6. OayY\tJofiKoi ical OepaTrsrfoRres. Comp. ver. 2. Union of 
care for men's bodies with care for their souls is characteristic of 
Christ and of Christian missions. The miraculous cures of the 
apostolic age have given place to the propagation of medical and 
sanitary knowledge, which is pursued most earnestly under Christian 
influences. For Si^pxonro see on ii. 15, and for euayyeXtJojuic^oi see 
on ii. 10. Excepting ML i. 28, xvi. 20, i Cor. iv. 17, Trapra^ou 
occurs only here and three or four times in Acts : here it goes with 
both participles. 

^ 7-0. The Fears of Herod. Mt places this section much later 
(xiv. 1-13); but Mk. (vi. 14-16) agrees with Lk. in connecting it 
with the mission of the Twelve. It was their going in all directions 
up and down the villages ($wfpx OVTO Kara ras fc<o/jias) that caused the 
fame of Christ* s work to reach Herod favcpw yap eycVero TO SVO/JM 
avrov (Mk. vi. 14), or, at anyrate, excite his fears. 

7. 'Hp<&i]s * Trp<pxos. So also Mt But ML gives him his 
courtesy title of ^oo-iXevs. Seeoniii i,p.83. 


means "all that was being done" by Jesus and His disciples. 
There is no irdvra in Mt or Mk., either here or in the parallels to 
ver. i. See on viii. 45. The thoroughly classical word St^iropev 
does not occur in LXX, nor in N.T. excepting in Lk. (Acts iL 12, 
v. 24, x. 17). Antipas was " utterly at a loss" as to what he was to 
think of Jesus. Note the change of tense : he heard once for all ; 
he remained utterly at a loss. He had no doubt heard of Christ 
before. It was the startling theories about Him which perplexed 

'laxfnjs ^Y^p6i) K reicp&ip. This is strong evidence of the effect 
of John's teaching. During his life he " did no sign," and yet they 
think it possible that so great a Prophet has risen from the dead 
and is working miracles. Comp. Mt xvi. 14; ML viiL 28. For 
CK vcKpw comp. xx. 35. For yytptir) (KB OLE 169) most MSS 
have eyT/yeprai, which is not to be accepted because yyepOy is found 

8. "HXeias c<jxnrj. The verb is changed from -rryepQi], because 
Elijah had not died. Mt represents Antipas as saying that Jesus 
is the risen Baptist, and omits the suggestions about Elijah and 
other Prophets. The account of Lk. is intrinsically more exact 
He would obtain good information at Csesarea from Herod's 
steward (viiL 3), and at Antioch from Herod's foster-brother (Acts 
xiiL i). 

irpo4QT7js rts T&V dpxauBK. We know from Jn. viL 40, 41 that 
some Jews distinguished the great Prophet of Deut xviii. 15 from 
the Messiah. Comp. Jn. L 21. And Mt xvi 14 seems to show 
that there was an expectation that Jeremiah or other Prophets 
would return at some future crisis. The r&v d/>xeuW is peculiar to 
Lk. (comp. ver. 19). It may be opposed either to a new Prophet 
(viL 1 6), or to the later Prophets as compared with Moses and 
Samuel. The former is more probable. 

9. *\a&vr\v ey^ &n-K<J><iXio-a. "As for John, / beheaded him." 
Mt and Mark represent Herod as saying of Christ, "This i& 
John the Baptist; he is risen from the dead": and some in- 
terpret this remark as meaning much the same : "Seeing that I 
put him to death, he may have risen again." But this is very 
unnatural Rather, " I thought that I had got rid of this kind of 
trouble when I beheaded John ; and here I am having it all over 
again." Perhaps, as Bede suggests, Antipas afterwards came to 
the conclusion that the Baptist had risen from the dead, a view 
which to his guilty conscience was specially unwelcome. Lk. men- 
tions the imprisonment of the Baptist by anticipation (iii. 20) ; but, 
excepting hi this remark of Antipas, he does not record his death. 

TOIOUTO. This may refer either to the works of Christ or to 
the speculations of the multitude respecting Him. Although 
John had wrought no miracles during his ministry (John x. 41} 


yet, if he had risen from the d&d, such things might be expected 
of him (Mt xiv. i). 

The *y* of TR, before <U*W if of very doubtful authority (A D X T etc.): 
Treg. brac>ets, Tisch. WH RV. omit It would have no point 

^TCI, *SK aWr. Not merely "he desired 1 ; (AV.), but "he 
tontonued staking to see Him." He made various attempts to 
apply a test which would have settled the question. Herod knew 
the Baptist ; and he could soon determine whether this was John 
or not, if only he could see Him. Comp. xxiii 8, where the 
gratification of this desire is recorded No doubt it was not 
merely the wish to settle the question of identity which led Antipas 
to try to see Jesus* That he was a Sadducee is a guess of Scholten. 

1O-17. The Feeding of the Five Thousand. This is the one 
miracle which is recorded by all four Evangelists (Mt xiv. 13; 
Mk. vi. 30 ; Jn. vl i). In all four it is the climax of the ministry. 
Henceforward attention is directed more and more to the death 
which will bring Christ's work to a close. From S. John we learn 
that it took place shortly before the Passover. All four accounts 
should be compared. Each contributes some special features, 
and each appears to be to a large extent independent The marks 
of LL's style are abundant in his narrative. 

10. fiFooTpetyaires. See small print on L 56. Lk. connects the 
miracle with the return of the Twelve ; but he gives no hint as to 
the time of their absence. We may perhaps allow a few weeks. He 
does not often call the Twelve ot AwScrroXoi (vi 13, xvii. 5. xxiL 
14, xxiv. 10). 

SnjY 1 l <Tai ' TO a ^ T ^ ra fcroMjcraK. What this was has already 
been recorded in brief (ver. 6). It is strange that anyone should 
infer from LL's not expressly mentioning, as Mk. does (vi. 12, 13), 
the casting out of demons, "that Lk. wishes us to believe that 
they had failed in this respect," and "had evidently been able to 
carry out only a part of their commission." Lk. records the sue* 
cess of the Seventy in exorcizing demons (x. 17) : why should he 
wish to insinuate that the Twelve had failed ? Excepting Mk. v. 
16, ix 9 ; Heb. xi. 32, Si^y^tcrflat occurs only in Lk. (viiL 39 ; 
Acts viii. 33, ix. 27, xii. 17). Comp. ver. 49. Lk. perhaps wishes 
us to understand that it was the report which the Apostles brought 
of their doings that led to Christ's taking them apart, as Mk. says, 
for rest Mt states that it was the news of the Baptist's death 
which led to the withdrawal Jn. has only a vague /aera ravra 
All may be correct ; but there can have been no borrowing. 
apaXap&K afaorfs. Comp. ver. 28, xviii 31. 
drwxdpTjacr KOT* I8wu% The verb occurs only here and v, 16 
in NT. Comp. Ecclus. xiiL 9 (12). Lk. does not seem to bo 
aware that Christ and His disciples went by boat across the lak* 


(ML Mk. Jn.), while the multitude went round by land Hence 
it is possible that he supposed that the miiade took place near 
Bethsaida on the west shore, and not at Bethsaida Julias on the 
Jordan near the north-east end of the lake. See D*B? art 
u Bethsaida." Mt Mk. and LL all have W 

The common reading, efc rbror tpq/tow r&ew Ka\ovfttrtjt 
(ACEGHKMSUV etc., Aeth. Ann. Goth.), seems to be an ingenious 
conflation of the original text t els r6Xi* jcaXov/i^y Erjfoaio'd (BLX 33, 
Boh. Sah.), which is supported by D [only K&PTJV for r6Xw], with a correc- 
tion of it y els r6Tov tprjfJ0r (K*) or fr TOTOW tpww Bijflffoiffrf (b c ff, 1 g 
Vulg. Syr.), or els rfaoy tpripov /caXotfjuepoF Eijd<rai8d (a e f). These correction* 
would be suggested by ver. 12 and Mt. and Mk. and the difficulty of associat- 
nig the miracle with a v6\is. See WH. iL Intr. p. 102, and also Wordsw. 
Vulg. in loco. For other apparent instances of conflation see XL 54, xuV. 18, 
xxiv. 53. Note Lk.'s favourite ' 

11. ol 8e <>xXot yv&vTt* ^KoXou'OTjdaK afir$. The Baptist was 
dead and the Twelve had returned to Jesus, so that there was no 
Jonger any counter-attraction. No Evangelist tells us how long 
Jesus and the disciples enjoyed their privacy before the multitudes 

diroScfcipcKos adroJs. " He gave them a welcome," as they had 
given Him (see on viii. 40), although their arrival destroyed the 
retirement which He had sought As Jn. states, it was Hk 
miracles of healing which attracted them rather than His teaching, 
For Sa/*vos (K B D LX B i 33 69) A C etc. have &fa/iej/o? : 
the compound is peculiar to Lk. It corresponds to c<nrXa7^rfty 
in Mt and Mk. 

eXdXct aoTois ircpl TTJS p<*<r. T. 8., ic.T.X. " He continued speak- 
ing to them about the kingdom of God ; and those who had need 
of cure He healed." See on v. 17 and ix 6. Neither Mt nor 
Jn. say anything about His teaching the multitudes, or about His 
; any of diem. 

12. ?) 82 Tjfi^pa 4jp|aTe icXCvciv. Comp. Jer. vi 4; Judg. six. II, ix. 3? 

I Sam. iv. 2. In N.T. Lk. alone uses jcX/peur intransitively (xxiv. 29). 
Comp. tatXfrere av* atrwv (Rom. xvi. 17). In Att Grk. K>dr&y is genei 
ally trans., 6.TroK\iveu> intrans. Win. xxxvui. I, p. 315. 

s 8e ot SrfSeica. In the three it is the Twelve whf 
lake the initiative ; in Jn. it is the Lord who does so. 

els T^S ic^ieX? KWfJta? ical iypovs. Being s^lftr in meaning, the notmi 
have only one article, although they differ in gender : comp. L 6 and adv. 23! 
and contrast z. 21 and xiv. 26. See on i 6. 

Here only in N.T., but quite class. It is speci- 
ally used of provisions for a journey : Gen. xliL, 25, xlv. 21 ; Josh. 
h 5, ii ; Judith iL 18, iv. 5 ; Xen. Anab. L 5. 9, vii r. 9. 

13. Both 7v 8t and xpos are in LL's style, and tvsithei 
occurs in the parallels. The same is true of vdvroL, anc in vec 


14 of irpos and the second a><rel Note the emphatic 
" ye are to find food for them, not they." There is no need to 
supply anything after el fi^n ij^ets dyopao-wjiec. *' We have no more 
than five loaves," leads quite naturally to " unless we are to go 
and buy," etc. ; and then the sentence is complete. The state- 
ment expresses perplexity (Weiss), not sarcasm (Schanz). 

OVK clo'lr ^jjiiv irXctov ^ -r&r*. The TXetb* 4 vtvrt is virtually plur, 
and has * plur. verb. For the subjunct after tl w comp. i Cor. xiv. 5, 
and see Win. ill 2. b, p. 368, and Burton, 252, 253. The subjuncU after 
el is not rare in bte Grk. But this is rather a delib. srbjunct 

Jn, tells us that it was Andrew who pointed out the lad with 
the loaves, and that they were of barley-bread. On the whole, 
his narrative is the most precise. The ^cts, like the preceding 
v/icis, is emphatic. 

14. &re! oyBpes rairaicurxtXioi. They were roughly counted 
as about a hundred companies with about fifty men in each. 
Note the a^Spcs : not av^puwrw. The women and children, as 
Mk. tells us, were not included in the reckoning. They would be 
much less numerous than the men. Lk. says nothing about the 
grass, which all the others mention, and which made the com- 
panies in their Oriental costumes look like flower-beds 
as ML indicates. 

a&rota rXwrfo*. The verb is peculiar to Lk* in N.T. (viL 
36, xiv. 8, xxiv. 30) ; in LXX Num. xxiv. 9 ; Exod. xxi. 18 ; Judg. v. 27 ; 
Judith xii. 15. The K\tffUa is cogn. ace. It occurs here only m bibL Grk. 
Comp, Jos. Ant. xu. 3. zi ; Plut. Strtor. xxvi 

did ircKT^KOHTo. In the spaces between the groups the 
Apostles would be able to move freely and distribute the food 
That the arrangement (50, 5000) has any relation to the five loaves 
is not likely. The dw is distributive : comp. x. i ; Mt xx. 9 
Jn. iL 6 ; Rev. iv. 8. 

16. Here Mt Mk. and Lk. are almost verbatim the samp 
All three mention the taking the loaves and fishes, the looking up 
to heaven, the blessing, and the breaking, and the giving to the 
disciples. For euXoyt]0'i> Jn. has evxaptoriyora?. This blessing or 
thanksgiving is the usual grace before meat said by the host or thE 
head of the house. The Talmud says that "he who enjoys augbt 
without thanksgiving is as though he robbed God." We are 
probably to understand that this blessing is the means of the 
mirade. Comp. Jn. vi 23 ; and of feeding the four thousand 
(Mt xv. 36; Mk. viiL 6); and of the eucharist (Mt xxvi 26, 
ML adv. 22; Lk. xxii. 17, 19; i Cor. XL 24). The manner of 
the mirade cannot be discerned : it is a literal fulfilment of Mt \\ 
33. Lk alone mentions that Jesus blessed the loaves, cvAo^crtv 

The preceding articles, TO^S wei/rc errors u -rods 8w> 


mean those which had been mentioned before in ver, 13, 
where the words have no article. 

8tSou TOIS ji<x07jTais. " Continued giving them to the disciples * 
The imperf. in the midst of aorists is graphic. Comp. xxiv. 30 ; 
ML viii. 6, and contrast xxii. 19 ; Mk. xiv. 22. 

17. The verbal resemblance between the three accounts con- 
tinues. For xopT<a0Y]craj' see on vi. 21, and take KXao-fjLdiw after TO 
ircpto-o-cwav (De W. Harm). All four mention the twelve KO<U/OL, 
as also does Mt. in referring to this mirade (xvi. 9) ; whereas at 
the feeding of the four thousand (Mt. xv. 37 ; Mk. viii 8), and in 
referring to it (Mt. xvi. 10), the word used for basket is cnrvpk. It 
is the more remarkable that Lk. and Jn. both have /co'<ivoi because 
they do not mention the other miracle. The cnrupis was large, cap- 
able of holding a man (Acts ix. 25). The Kofavos was the wallet 
carried by every travelling Jew, to avoid buying food from Gentiles : 
fud&is quorum cofhinus fznumque supellex (Juv. Sat. iii 14). 
Comp. nupsisti, Gellia, dstifero^ "thou hast married a Jew" (Mart. 
Epig* v. 17. 4). These exact details would scarcely have been 
maintained so consistently in a deliberate fiction or in a myth. 
Still less would either 'fiction pr myth have represented one who 
could multiply food at will as giving directions that the fragments 
should not be wasted (Jn. vL 12). The jpossessor of an in- 
exhaustible purse is never represented as being watchful against 

Note the climax in ver. 17. They not only ate, but were 
satisfied, all of them ; and not only so, but there was something 
over, far more than the original supply. 

Weiss well remarks that "the criticism which is afraid of miracles finds 
itself in no small difficulty in the presence of this narrative. It is guaranteed 
by all our sources which rest upon eye-witness; and these show the inde- 
pendence of then* tradition by their de\ mtions, which do not affect the kernel 
of the matter, and cannot be explained by any tendencies whatever. In the 
presence of this fact the possibility of myth or invention is utterly inad- 
missible. . . . Only this remains absolutely incontrovertible, that it is the 
intention of all our reports to narrate a miracle ; and by this we must abide, if 
the origin of the tradition is not to abide an entirely inexplicable riddle " (L. J* 
it pp. 196-200, Eng. tr. ii. pp. 381-385). The explanation that Christ's 
generosity in giving away the food of His party induced others who had food 
to give it away, and that thus there was enough for all, is plainly not what 
the Evangelists mean, and it does not explain then* statements. Would such 
generosity suggest that He was the Messiah, or induce them to try to make 
Him long ? Still more inadequate is the suggestidn of Renan : Grace um 
extreme frugality la troupe sainte y vecut ; on ftp* naturellement voir en 
ctla un miracle ( V. dej. p. 198). 

The Confession of Peter and First Announcement of 
the Passion. Mt xvL 13-21; ML viii. 27-31. No connexion 
with the miracle just related is either stated or implied Lk 
omits the sequel of the miracle, the peremptory dismissal of the 


disciples and gradual dismissal of the people, the storm, the walk 
ing on the sea, the discourse on the Bread of Life, the Syro- 
pheniaan 'woman, the Ephphatha miracle, the feeding of the 
four thousand, the forfeiting to take bread, and the healing of a 
blind man at Betb^aiJa Julias (Mt xiv. 22-xvi. 12 ; ML vL 45- 
viii. 26; Jn. vi. 14-71). Can he then have seen either Mt or 
Mk. ? So also here * both the others mention that the incident took 
place near Ccesarea Philippi, on the confines of heathenism. Lk. 
mentions no place. It is a desperate expedient to suppose with 
Reuss, that the copy of Mk. which Lk. knew chanced to omit 
these sections. From ver. 18 to ver. 50 Lk. is once more parallel 
in the main to the other two. 

18. (Cal ylKCTO tv T$ etvai afcrdi' irpooreuxopieyoK. See note at 
the end of ch. i. and on iii. 21. For the periphrastic infinitive 
comp. xi. i, and Burton, 97. Jesus Patrem rogarat^ ut discipulis 
$e mefaret. J\'am ar^umenfum precum Jesu colligi potest ex ser- 
monibus a ctlonibu sque insecutis ; vi. 12, 13 (Beng.). 

jtlvas. Perhaps x^poj was originally understood. But the ex- 
pression is used as a simple adv. and is sometimes written as one word, Kara- 
pAras. In N.T. only here and Mk. iv. I a In LXX Ps. iv. 9, xxxii 15 ; 
Jer* xv. 17; Lam. iii. 28. 

<rwfjcraK auTw ot piflijTau This almost amounts to a contra- 
diction of what precedes. "When He was alone praying, His 
disciples were with Him." " Alone "no doubt means "in pri- 
vate," or " in a solitary spot," and may be taken with crwi}arav : so 
that the contradiction is only on the surface. Moreover we are 
perhaps to understand that His prayer was solitary : His disciples 
did not join in it In either case Kara povas is quite intelligible, 
although the disciples may have been dose to Him. But it is 
possible that the true reading is (rwyvrrjo-av, meaning, "His disciples 
met Him, fell in with Him," as He was engaged in prayer. This 
is the reading of B*, which a later scribe has corrected to cm^o-ai/. 
And B* is here supported by the Old Latin f (occurreruni) and 
one excellent cursive (157), besides two less important authorities. 
Nevertheless, it is on the whole more probable that on/^vnyo-av is 
an early attempt to get rid of the apparent contradiction involved 
in icara ftovas erw^o-ai/. See Expositor , 3rd series, iv. p. 159. 
Elsewhere in N.T. owelvat occurs only Acts xxii. n, 

SMX "Yjicts 8& With great emphasis : " But ye who do ye say 
that I am?" The impulsiveness of Peter, and his position as 
spokesman for the Twelve, are here conspicuous. He is oro/wi TOW 
XopoO ; viiL 45, xiL 41, xviii. 28. Licet c&teri apostoli sciant^ Petrus 
tamen respondiipm c&teris (Bede). 

tor Xpwrro* TOW ecoo. "Whom God hath anointed M and sent : 
eft cm K. &* Here Mk. has simply o Xpurro?, and Mt o XPKTTO< 


6 wos rov <S>eov rov tfavros. See Keim on this confession, as ** 
solemn event of the very highest character" (Jes. of Nax. IT. 
p. 263). Lk. and Mk. omit the praise bestowed on Peter for 
this confession, and the much discussed promise made to him 
(Mt xvL 17-19). Can it be of supreme importance? 

SI. p^yl Xyeii> TOUTO. Because of the grossly erroneous 
views about the Messiah which prevailed among the people. 
Shortly before this they had wished to take Him by force and 
make Him king (Jn. vi. 15). Hence Jesus never proclaimed 
Himself openly to the multitude as the Messiah ; and here, when 
He does to the Twelve, He explains the nature of His Kingdom, 
and strictly forbids them to make His Messiahship known. The 
nearest approach to exceptions to this practice are the Samaritan 
woman (Jn. iv. 26), and the outcast from the synagogue (Jn. ix. 37). 

Others explain the command to keep silence as prompted by the fear lest the 
guilt of those who were about to put Jesus to death should be increased by the 
disciples proclaiming Him as the Messiah, Others again suggest the fear lest 
the people, if they knew that He was the Messiah, should attempt to rescue 
Him from the death which it was necessary that He should undergo, Neither 
of these appears to be satisfactory. In any case the $< is adversative. "What 
Peter said was quite true : " but He charged them, and commanded." 

32. Lk. does not tell us, as Mk. does, and still more plainly 
Mt, that this was the beginning of Christ's predictions respecting 
His Passion: tjpfaro 8i8acriciv arrows on Act, ic.r.X (ML viii. 31); 
dird Tore i}paTo Sei/cvvcw, ic.rA. (ML xvL 21). The first announce- 
ment of such things must have seemed overwhelming. Peter's 
protest perhaps expressed the feeling of most of them. 

elirwy on Act. The on is recitative, not argumentative. The 
Ac! is here in all three; but elsewhere LL uses it much more 
often than any other Evangelist It expresses logical necessity 
irather than moral obligation (w<ei\v, Heb. iL 17) or natural fitness 
(iTrpexcy, Heb. iL 10). It is a Divine decree, a kw of the Divine 
nature, that the Son of Man must suffer. Prophecy had repeatedly 
intimated this decree. Comp. xiiL 33, xvii 25, xxiL 37, xxiv. 7, 26, 
44; Jn. iiL 14, etc. For TOP ulop TO d^p&rou, tike title which 
suggested, while it veiled, His Messiahship, see on v. 24. 

d-noSoKifjiadWjKat diro TWV, K.T.\. a Be rejected after investigation 
at the hands of the," etc. The Soieej&acrta was the scrutiny which 
an elected magistrate had to undergo at Athens, to see whether he 
was legally qualified to hold office. The hierarchy held such a 
scrutiny respecting the claims of Jesus to be the Christ, and 
rejected Him : xvii. 25, xx. 17 ; i Pet iL 4, 7. For the dir<5, "at 
the hands of," comp. Ecdus. xx. 20; Lk. viL 35; Acts ii 22; 
Jas, L 13; Rev. xiL 6. 

TUP- -n-peo-puT^pwK leal dpx^p*^ Kdl ypafifiaT&i'. The three 
aouns, as forming one body, have one article. So also in Mt 


xvi. 21. In Mk. xiv. 43, 53, where the Sanhedrin is spoken of 
with similar fulness all three nouns have the article. The apx t " 
P? aie rarely placed second: comp. xx. 19; Mt xvi. 21; Mk. 
viii. 31. The common formulae are apx yp a P~$ ^rpw/8. or Apx* 
and ap 

u The pass, of drojcrekw is late Grk. Classical writers use 
OrfffKu or d*oft^<r*w. For rj Tpfrp fyify? Mk. has the less accurate A* r4 
rpett W/y. He also has dwwnrijwu, while Mt has typ67jvai, which u 
probably nght here ; but faturri)i><u (A C D, Just Ong.) is well supported. 

Lk. omits Peter's protest against the declaration that Christ 
must suffer, and the severe rebuke which he received. His omission 
of " Get thee behind Me, Satan," is sufficient answer to those who 
assert that it is out of ill-will to Peter that Lk. omits " Blessed art 
thou, Simon Bar-Jonah." See on v. 10 and xxii. 54-62. 

23-27. The Self-Renouncement required in Christ's Followers. 
Mt xvi. 24-28 ; Mk, viii. 34-ix. i. Although the manner of intro- 
ducing the words is different in all three, the similarity between the 
reports of the words is very close throughout, especially in the 
words quoted rr. 23, 24. Throughout the Gospels it is in 
the records of Christ's sayings that the closest resemblances are 
found. Comp. xviii. 16, 17, 25, 27. 

23 irpos rein-as. Both words are characteristic : see on ver. 43 
and i. 13. The raVras represents ML's rbv o^Xov <rvw TOI$ /*a^ 
TfltL?. The necessity of self-denial and self-sacrifice was made 
known to all, although for the present the supreme example of the 
necessity was a mystery revealed gradually to a very few. 

dpoTw TOV oraupop aurou ica0* TJji^pai>. This is the first mention 
of the cross in Lk. and Mk. Its associations were such that this 
declaration must have been startling. The Jews, especially in 
Galilee, knew well what the cross meant Hundreds of the 
followers of Judas and Simon had been crucified (Jos. Ant 
xviii. 10. 10). It represents, therefore, not so much a burden as an 
instrument of death, and it was mentioned because of its familiar 
associations. Comp. xiv. 27 ; Mt x. 38. The ica0* Iftutpav here is 
peculiar to Lk. : comp. i Cor. xv. 31. We must distinguish be- 
tween dKoXouflemo fxoi, "follow Me loyally," and dirurw jmou !px<r6ai, 
" become My disciple." There are three conditions of discipleship: 
self-denial, bearing one's cross, and obedience* 

24. Ss 7&p av OeXrj. Here, as in ver. 23, " will " (AV,) is too weak u 
a translation of 6\eiv t being too like the simple future: "desireth" or 
*'willeth" is better: st gins vult> gia enim voluerit. Such inadequate 
renderings zfQeXciv are common in AV. (xk. 14; Jn* vi. 67, viL 17, viii. 44). 
See small print on x* 22. Comp. xui. 33. 

5. r y&p jtycXeiTcu avfywiros. The same verb is used by all 
three; but A\T, obliterates this by rendering " profit w in Mt and 


Mk., and "advantage" in Lk. Again, SijfuuOjjpai is common to 
all three : yet AV. has " lose * in ML and Mk., and " cast away * in 
Lk. The opposition between /cepSos and 7/u'a is common in Grk. 
See Lft. on PhiL hi. 7. In N.T. the act. fyfjuSw does not occur, but 
only the pass, with either ace. of the thing confiscated (PhiL iii. 8), 
or dat. with & (2 Cor. vii. 9),^ or absol. (i Cor. iiL 15), The 
lavrov is equivalent to r^v t^x 7 / v * n ver - 2 4 an( * ' m ML and ML 
To be excluded from eternal life is death. Lk. omits "What 
should a man give in exchange for his life?'* We must keep 
* life " for fax*} throughout the passage : the context shows when 
it means life as men desire it on earth, and when life as the blessed 
enjoy it in the Kingdom. The Gospel has raised the meaning of 
^vx?7, as of cui7, to a higher power. Comp. Rev. xii. n. Frumen- 
tum si servas perdiS) si seminas renovas (Bede). 

For the combination of aor. part, with fat. indie, comp. 3 Jru 6, and 
Barton, 141. 

26. ^iraicrxu^T) fie ital rods Ifiods X<5yous. ML omits. The 
' in comp. means "on account of": this is the ground of his 
shame: comp. xiiL 26, 27. For the constr. comp. Rom. i. 16; 
2 Tim. i. 8, 16 ; Heb. ai 16. The lv rjj 8(5|fl aurou refers to the 
Trapovo-ta, not to the Resurrection (xiL 36, xviL 24, xviiL 8, xix. 15, 
xxi. 27), and is the first mention by Lk. of Christ's promising to 
return in glory. Lk. omits "in this adulterous generation " (ML). 

27. dXqOws. With Xeyo), not with what follows. ML and Mk. 
have aprfv, which Lk. uses much less frequently than the others. 
In xil 44 and xxL 3 Lk. has aXyBus where ML has d/Myv. For 
afiroG, " here," comp. Acts xv. 34 ; ML xxvL 36. ML and Mk. 
have 58c. 

ycJo-wrrat Qavdrov. The expression is found in the Talmud, 
but not in O.T. Comp. ML xvL 28; Jn. viil 52; Heb. iL 9. It 
implies experience of the bitterness of death. Comp. l&etv Bavarov 
(ii. 26) and 0<opv (Jn. vhL 51). Foryofeo-tfat in the sense 
of " experience '* comp. Heb. vi. 4, 5 ; Ps. xxxiv. 9. 

Tt}v pcwriXeiav' TOU 6eou. Mk. adds ZXyXvOviav IK Sm'a/ut, and 
Mt. substitutes r. vlov rov avOp. ep^opcvov kv TQ /3a<rtXta, avrov. 
The meaning is much disputed. The principlal interpretations 
are : r. The Transfiguration^ which all three accounts dosely con- 
nect with this prediction (most of the Fathers, Euthym. Theophyl. 
Maldoru); 2. The Resurrection and Ascension (Cajetan, Calvin, 
Beza) ; 3. Pentetost and the great signs which followed it (Godet, 
Hahn) ; 4. The spread of Christianity (Nosgen) ; $ The internal 
development of the Gospel (Erasmus, Klostennann) ; 6. The destruc- 
tion of Jerusalem (Wetstein, Alford, Morison, Plumptre, Mansel) ; 
7. The Second Advent (Meyer, Weiss, Holtzmann). No inter- 
pretation can be correct that does not explain curt? rives, which 


implies the exceptional pri'dkge of$ome, as distinct from the common 
experience of alL "I his teat seems to exclude all but the first and 
the sixth of these interpretations ; and, if we must choose between 
these two, the sixth must be right. " Shall not taste of death 
until *' cannot refer exclusively to an event to take place the next 
week. But both may be right The Transfiguration, witnessed 
by only three of those present, was a foretaste of Christ's glory 
both on earth and in heaven. The destruction of Jerusalem, 
witnessed by S. John and perhaps a few others of those present, 
swept away the remains of the Old Dispensation and left the 
Go:pel in possession of the field. Only so far as the destruction 
of Jerusalem was a type of the end of the world is there a 
reference to the irapowria (see on xxi. 32). A direct reference to 
the vapoima is excluded by the fact that none of those present 
lived to witness it, except in the sense that all men will witness it 
Jesus has told us that during His life on earth He was ignorant of 
the date of the day of judgment (Mk. xiii. 32) : and we cannot 
suppose that in spite of that ignorance He predicted that it was ; still less that He uttered a prediction which has not been 
fulfilled. Moreover, the oti JJLTJ yeuVwvrai Ga^drou ew? implies that 
the nm will experience death after seeing the cur. T. ov, which 
would not be true of those who live to see the irapowia (i Con 
xv. 51). 

28-36, The Transfiguration. Mt xvii. 1-13; ML ix. 2*13. 
Both LL (zu 31, 32) and Mt (xvii. 6, 7) give details which Mk. 
omits ; but ML has very little (part of ix. 3) which is not in either 
of the others. 

Here again (see on viii. 35-39, 40-48) the marks of Lk.'s diction are numer- 
ous: ^y^ero, o><reJ(ver, 28); ^y^" ero tT$ with mfin. (29); &v$pct (30); 
<riJj> &p8p&s (32); iyirtro, iv r, clrer r/>6s, evKrr&ra (33); ei r$ (34); 
eyfvero (35); iv r(, xal a^rof, dr^YVeiXay, 9 tic el* ait ra?t 
otiStr &f (36). 

For comment see Tert Adv. Marcion. iv. 22 ; Trench, Studies 
in the Gospels^ pp. 184-214; Herzog, PRE> art Verklarung^ 
omitted in 2nd ed ; Schaif s Herzog art " Transfiguration." 

28. &i! ^fi^pai ^KT(5. A nom, without construction of any 
kind. Comp. Acts v. 7; Mt xv. 32; ML viii. 2, and ^Xeov in 
ver. 13. Win* IviiL 4, p. 648. The other two have "after six 
days," which agrees with " about eight days." We can hardly say 
that LL is "improving their chronology." It looks as if he had not 
seen their expression. For wapaXapc^ comp. ver. 10, and for the 
order of the names see on viii. 51. Note that LL changes the 
order of the names. He places John before James (viii. 51), which 
may be because he wrote after John had become the better known. 

el$ T& opos. The others have efe Spo<s iujrrjXov. Both expressions 
would fit Hennon, which is about 9200 feet high, and would easiJy 


be reached in a week from Csesarea Philippi. It is still called 
Jebelesh Sheikh^ "the chief mountain." It is higher than Lebanon 
(8500) or Anti-Lebanon (8700), and its isolated white summit is 
visible from many eminences throughout Palestine (Conder, Hand- 
book of the Bible, p. 205 ; D.B?\. p. 1339; Tristram, Bible Places^ 
p. 280). A tradition, which is first mentioned by Cyril of Jeru- 
salem (Catech, xu. 16), places the scene of the Transfiguration on 
Tabor, 1 which at this time seems to have had a village or town on 
the top, which Josephus fortified against Vespasian (B.J. iv. i. 8). 
In that case the solitude (/car* l&tav) which is required for the 
Transfiguration would be impossible. The trpocreuSocrSai is peculiar 
to this account : see on lii. 21, a similar occasion. 

29. f^yero . . . Tpoy. The Gentile Lk. writing for Gentiles 
avoids the word /T/>p<(i)077 (Mt. xvii. 2 ; Mk. ix. 2), which might 
be understood of the metamorphosis of heathen deities. Comp eV 
&/) /*o/o<$ ([ML] xvL 12). The XUK<$$ need not be made ad- 
verbial. The asyndeton is not violent, if it be made co-ordinate 
with co<rr/5cwrr<t>v, a word which occurs Ezek. i. 4, 7 ; Nah. iii. 3. 

30. Both avSpcs and otrt^s are peculiar to Lk. here : see ii. 4, 
The three Apostles saw the forms of two men who were such as to 
be recognized as Moses and Elijah, the representatives of the 
Law and the Prophets. The power to recognize them was granted 
with the power to see them ; otherwise the sight would have been 
meaningless. In the same way S. Paul recognized Ananias in a 
vision, although he had not previously known him (Acts ix. 12). 
We might render the (drives "who were no others than." That 
Moses was to reappear as well as Elijah at the beginning of the 
Messianic Kingdom, was a later dream of the Rabbis* See Lightfoot, 
Hor. Heb. ad loc. See small print on ii. 22 for the form Moucnjs. 

81, 82. Peculiar to LL See on xxii. 43. 

ri\v Io8oi> afrrou. His departure from this world by means of 
the Passion, Resurrection, and Ascension. Comp. the use of 
cwroSos in Acts xiii. 24. For lloSos in the sense of death see 
2 Pet i. 15 ; Wisd. iii. 2, vii. 6. That the Apostles heard this 
subject being discussed explains part of the meaning of the 
Transfiguration. It was to calm their minds, which had recently 
been disturbed by the prediction of Christ's sufferings and death. 2 
The -JjjjLfXXcv corresponds to Set in ver. 22. It is all ordained by 
God, and is sure to take place ; and when it takes place it may be 
regarded as a fulfilment (^rX^pow), and also as a filling full. There 
were types and prophecies shadowing forth the Divine purpose, 
every detail of which must be gone through. 

1 In the Greek Church the Feast of die Transfiguration, Aug. 6th, h called 
OajScS/uor. The combination in Ps, bcni*. 12 may be noted. 
* In transfiguration* ittud princtpahttr agcbatuT) ut de c&rdibus discipufarum 
s tolteretitr (Leo the Great, Serm* iliv., Migne, liv. 3x0). 


It fe p*O - to r >e re:rK*e<l that RV. retains "accomplish," whirh is iu 
freq. render.,^ of rrV*^ *jn. iv. 34, \. 30 ; Acts xx, 24; Jn. xvii. 4, etc ), 
in^ad of su> lUuMij; " LHii," which is lU fteq. rendering of ir\i]p6<a (xxi. 24, 
xaaL 16, xxiv* 44; Actsi. 16, etc.)* And why not u exodus" here, and 
Heb. xi 22, and 2 Pet. i. 15, for *o3os? 

ppttpTiji*voi vimp. In N.T. only the pass, of this verb is found, and 
the best writers do not x^e the pres. of either voice. In Mt xxvi. 43 it is 
used of the eyes of these -MBC thre<- being heavy with sleep ; comp, Lk. xxi. 
345 * Cor, L S, T. 4; i Tim. T. 16. 

having remained awake " in spite 
of this sleepiness would be the common meaning of the word j x 
but perhaps here it means "having become thoroughly awake." 
Syr-Sin, has " when they awoke." It is a late word, and occurs 
nowhere else in N.T or LXX. Lk. is fond of compounds with 
Sta : Siayipoxr/cciv, SiaSc^co^at, StaAecVctv, StaXvciv, Stave/xctv, 8ui- 
, SutTrovuo'Bat, Stairo/jcti/, SwtTrpay/iaraJeo-^at, etc. 

As the invention of a later hand these two verses (31, 32) do not explain 
themselves. What is the motive for the invention? As a narrative of fects 
they throw much Light on the whole situation. 

83. iv TW 8iaxptj(r0tH aurods dir* afaou. " As they were part- 
ing from Him." This again is in Lk, only, and it explains Peter's 
remark. His first impulse is to prevent Moses and Elijah from 
going away. He wishes to make present glory and rapture 

tlittv 6 n^rpos. Mt and Mk. add oa-o/cpi&w. It is his response 
to what he saw. For "EiriordTa see on v. 5. He says that "it is 
good for us to be here," not "it is better." There is no comparison 
with any other condition. The Vjp,a$ probably means the Apostles, 
not all six persons. The Apostles are ready to help in erecting 
the <TKip>oiL If they were to remain there, they must have shelter. 

jjw) clS&s S Xfycu We need not follow Tertullian in interpret* 
ing this of a state of ecstasy (amentia), as of one rapt into another 
world. Mk. tell us plainly why Peter "wist not what to answer," 
&ooi yap cyo/ojro : and this he would have from Peter himself. 
In any case, neither Peters strange proposal nor the comment 
upon it looks like invention. 

84. ey^Kcro Y*$kr\ KCU ircnaaej> afrrotfe. Mt Calls it (fxirrcwrj, 
a "luminous cloud" Here there is perhaps an association of 
ideas, suggested by similarity of sound, between IvccrKlcgw and 
the Shechinah or $6rj mentioned in ver. 31. Comp. knarKtalfr 
hi rty cncqrijv y ve^eX^ (ExoA 3d. 29). Strictly speaking a 
luminous cloud cannot overshadow; but it may veil. Light may 
be as blinding as darkness. We cannot be sure whether the auroJs 
includes the three Apostles or not It does not include them in 

. . . 9iayfnrYop^<rarret (Herodian, iii 4. 8). 


ver. 33, and probably does not include them here. The reading 
fccfvou? flvfXfatv (A D P R) is meant to exclude the Apostles ; but 
cfoX0ctv avrovs (K B C L) is right See D.B? art " Cloud." 

36. For cfrwvTj tyfrrro see on liL 22, and comp. Exod xx\iiu 9. The 
reading tyairrrrfo (A CD PR) for iKXeXrflUvos (KBLS) comes from Mt 
and Mk. The Versions are divided, and in many copies of the Aethu the two 
readings are combined. Syr-Sin, has " the chosen/* 

33, & T$ yi>&r0<u T^JK fyuvfy. "After the voice had come"; 
t.. when it had ceased : see on Hi. 21. Syr-Sin, has " when there 
was the voice." Peter had wished to make three tabernacles, as 
if Moses and Elijah were to be as abiding as Christ ; but now the 
Law and the Prophets pass away, ita dimissis, quasi jam et offirio 
et honore dispunctis (Tertul. Adv. Mardon. iv. 22), and evpeOij 
'I-jycrovs povos. 

ical aurol crLyi|<rap Kal ouSeva dTr^yyeiXap ir ^Ketvais rals ^pcpai?. 
See on v. 14, on viil 20, and on L 39. Lk. tells us that they kept 
silent ; Mt tells us that Jesus charged them to tell no one until 
the Son of Man was risen from the dead. ML relates both the 
command and their observance of it. The prohibition to speak 
of what they had se',n is a strong confirmation of the incident as 
an historical fact If the vision is an invention, how can we ex- 
plain the invention of such a prohibition ? The statement of all 
three, that the Transfiguration took place a week after the preced- 
ing incident, the characteristic impulsiveness of Peter, and the 
healing of the demoniac boy immediately afterwards, are marks of 
historical reality. 

But, as in the case of other miracles, while we admit the fact, we most 
remain in ignorance as to the manner. Were Moses and Elijah, who were 
mysteriously removed from the earth, here present in the body! Or were their 
disembodied spirits made visible? Or was it a mere vision, in which they only 
seemed to be present ? We cannot say : the third alternative is not excluded by 
the fact that all three saw it, whereas a mere vision is perceived by only one, 
As Weiss well remarks, " We are not here concerned with a vision produced by 
natural causes, but with one sent directly by God " ; and he adds, " Our narrative 
presents no stumbling-block for those who believe in divine revelation " (L. L 
11. pp. 319, 320, Eng. tr. in. p. 103). The silence of S. John respecting toe 
whole incident is thoroughly intelligible, (i) It had already been recorded 
three times ; (2) the glorification of Jesus as the Son of God, which is here set 
forth in a special incident, is set forth by him throughout his whole Gospel. 

iwpatcav. With this form of the 3rd pers. plur. pert comp 
and fyxw/cox (Jn. xvii. 6, 7), dpijicap (Rev. xix, 3), ytyara* (Rev. xxi. 6), 
efcreXifXutfay (Jas. v. 4) ; also Rom. xvL 7 ; Col. iL I ; Rev. xviii, 3. Such 
forms are common in inscriptions and in the Byzantine writers. Win. xiii. 
2* c, p. 90 ; Gregory, Prokgom. p. 124. In meaning the perfect seems here 
to be passing into the aorist ; Burton, 88, but see 78. 

87-43. The Heali